Cargando…

Innovative customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium lingual retainer versus standard stainless-steel lingual retainer: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) customized nitinol retainers with standard stainless-steel fixed retainers over a 12-month study period. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted on 62 patients randomly allocated to a control...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gelin, Emilie, Seidel, Laurence, Bruwier, Annick, Albert, Adelin, Charavet, Carole
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Association of Orthodontists 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7642231/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33144526
http://dx.doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2020.50.6.373
_version_ 1783606050920857600
author Gelin, Emilie
Seidel, Laurence
Bruwier, Annick
Albert, Adelin
Charavet, Carole
author_facet Gelin, Emilie
Seidel, Laurence
Bruwier, Annick
Albert, Adelin
Charavet, Carole
author_sort Gelin, Emilie
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) customized nitinol retainers with standard stainless-steel fixed retainers over a 12-month study period. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted on 62 patients randomly allocated to a control group that received stainless-steel retainers or a test group that received customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium retainers. Four time points were defined retainer placement (T0) and 1-month (T1), 6-month (T2), and 12-month (T3) follow-up appointments. At each time point, Little’s irregularity index (LII) (primary endpoint) and dental stability measurements such as intercanine width were recorded in addition to assessment of periodontal parameters. Radiological measurements such as the incisor mandibular plane angle (IMPA) were recorded at T0 and T3. Failure events (wire integrity or debonding) were assessed at each time point. RESULTS: From T0 to T3, LII and other dental measurements showed no significant differences between the two groups. The data for periodontal parameters remained stable over the study period, except for the gingival index, which was slightly, but significantly, higher in the test group at T3 (p = 0.039). The IMPA angle showed no intergroup difference. The two groups showed no significant difference in debonding events. CONCLUSIONS: This RCT conducted over a 12-month period demonstrated no significant difference between customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium lingual retainers and standard stainless-steel lingual retainers in terms of dental anterior stability and retainer survival. Both retainers eventually appeared to be equally effective in maintaining periodontal health.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7642231
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Korean Association of Orthodontists
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76422312020-11-25 Innovative customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium lingual retainer versus standard stainless-steel lingual retainer: A randomized controlled trial Gelin, Emilie Seidel, Laurence Bruwier, Annick Albert, Adelin Charavet, Carole Korean J Orthod Original Article OBJECTIVE: To compare computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) customized nitinol retainers with standard stainless-steel fixed retainers over a 12-month study period. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted on 62 patients randomly allocated to a control group that received stainless-steel retainers or a test group that received customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium retainers. Four time points were defined retainer placement (T0) and 1-month (T1), 6-month (T2), and 12-month (T3) follow-up appointments. At each time point, Little’s irregularity index (LII) (primary endpoint) and dental stability measurements such as intercanine width were recorded in addition to assessment of periodontal parameters. Radiological measurements such as the incisor mandibular plane angle (IMPA) were recorded at T0 and T3. Failure events (wire integrity or debonding) were assessed at each time point. RESULTS: From T0 to T3, LII and other dental measurements showed no significant differences between the two groups. The data for periodontal parameters remained stable over the study period, except for the gingival index, which was slightly, but significantly, higher in the test group at T3 (p = 0.039). The IMPA angle showed no intergroup difference. The two groups showed no significant difference in debonding events. CONCLUSIONS: This RCT conducted over a 12-month period demonstrated no significant difference between customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium lingual retainers and standard stainless-steel lingual retainers in terms of dental anterior stability and retainer survival. Both retainers eventually appeared to be equally effective in maintaining periodontal health. Korean Association of Orthodontists 2020-11-25 2020-11-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7642231/ /pubmed/33144526 http://dx.doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2020.50.6.373 Text en © 2020 The Korean Association of Orthodontists. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Gelin, Emilie
Seidel, Laurence
Bruwier, Annick
Albert, Adelin
Charavet, Carole
Innovative customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium lingual retainer versus standard stainless-steel lingual retainer: A randomized controlled trial
title Innovative customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium lingual retainer versus standard stainless-steel lingual retainer: A randomized controlled trial
title_full Innovative customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium lingual retainer versus standard stainless-steel lingual retainer: A randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Innovative customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium lingual retainer versus standard stainless-steel lingual retainer: A randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Innovative customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium lingual retainer versus standard stainless-steel lingual retainer: A randomized controlled trial
title_short Innovative customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium lingual retainer versus standard stainless-steel lingual retainer: A randomized controlled trial
title_sort innovative customized cad/cam nickel-titanium lingual retainer versus standard stainless-steel lingual retainer: a randomized controlled trial
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7642231/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33144526
http://dx.doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2020.50.6.373
work_keys_str_mv AT gelinemilie innovativecustomizedcadcamnickeltitaniumlingualretainerversusstandardstainlesssteellingualretainerarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT seidellaurence innovativecustomizedcadcamnickeltitaniumlingualretainerversusstandardstainlesssteellingualretainerarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT bruwierannick innovativecustomizedcadcamnickeltitaniumlingualretainerversusstandardstainlesssteellingualretainerarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT albertadelin innovativecustomizedcadcamnickeltitaniumlingualretainerversusstandardstainlesssteellingualretainerarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT charavetcarole innovativecustomizedcadcamnickeltitaniumlingualretainerversusstandardstainlesssteellingualretainerarandomizedcontrolledtrial