Cargando…

Post-treatment stability after 5 years of retention with vacuum-formed and bonded retainers—a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Retention after orthodontic treatment is still a challenge and more evidence about post-treatment stability and patients’ perceptions of different retention strategies is needed. OBJECTIVES: This trial compares removable vacuum-formed retainers (VFR) with bonded cuspid-to-cuspid retainer...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Krämer, Anke, Sjöström, Mats, Apelthun, Catharina, Hallman, Mats, Feldmann, Ingalill
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9912701/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35968668
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjac043
_version_ 1784885261002342400
author Krämer, Anke
Sjöström, Mats
Apelthun, Catharina
Hallman, Mats
Feldmann, Ingalill
author_facet Krämer, Anke
Sjöström, Mats
Apelthun, Catharina
Hallman, Mats
Feldmann, Ingalill
author_sort Krämer, Anke
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Retention after orthodontic treatment is still a challenge and more evidence about post-treatment stability and patients’ perceptions of different retention strategies is needed. OBJECTIVES: This trial compares removable vacuum-formed retainers (VFR) with bonded cuspid-to-cuspid retainers (CTC) after 5 years of retention. TRIAL DESIGN: A single centre two-arm parallel-group randomized controlled trial. METHODS: This trial included 104 adolescent patients, randomized into two groups (computer-generated), using sequentially numbered, opaque, and sealed envelopes. All patients were treated with fixed appliances in both jaws with and without tooth extractions. Patients in the intervention group received a VFR in the mandible (n = 52), and patients in the active comparator group received a CTC (n = 52). Both groups had a VFR in the maxilla. Dental casts at debond (T1), after 6 months (T2), after 18 months (T3), and after 5 years (T4) were digitized and analysed regarding Little’s Irregularity Index (LII), overbite, overjet, arch length, and intercanine and intermolar width. The patients completed questionnaires at T1, T2, T3, and T4. RESULTS: Post-treatment changes between T1 and T4 in both jaws were overall small. In the maxilla, LII increased significantly (median difference: 0.3 mm), equally in both groups. In the mandible, LII increased significantly in the group VFR/VFR (median difference: 0.6 mm) compared to group VFR/CTC (median difference: 0.1 mm). In both groups, overjet was stable, overbite increased, and arch lengths decreased continuously. Intercanine widths and intermolar width in the mandible remained stable, but intermolar width in the maxilla decreased significantly. No differences were found between groups. Regardless of retention strategy, patients were very satisfied with the treatment outcome and their retention appliances after 5 years. LIMITATIONS: It was not possible to perform blinded assessments of digital models at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Post-treatment changes in both jaws were small. Anterior alignment in the mandible was more stable with a bonded CTC retainer compared to a removable VFR after 5 years of retention. Patients were equally satisfied with fixed and removable retention appliances. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03070444).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9912701
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99127012023-02-13 Post-treatment stability after 5 years of retention with vacuum-formed and bonded retainers—a randomized controlled trial Krämer, Anke Sjöström, Mats Apelthun, Catharina Hallman, Mats Feldmann, Ingalill Eur J Orthod Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) BACKGROUND: Retention after orthodontic treatment is still a challenge and more evidence about post-treatment stability and patients’ perceptions of different retention strategies is needed. OBJECTIVES: This trial compares removable vacuum-formed retainers (VFR) with bonded cuspid-to-cuspid retainers (CTC) after 5 years of retention. TRIAL DESIGN: A single centre two-arm parallel-group randomized controlled trial. METHODS: This trial included 104 adolescent patients, randomized into two groups (computer-generated), using sequentially numbered, opaque, and sealed envelopes. All patients were treated with fixed appliances in both jaws with and without tooth extractions. Patients in the intervention group received a VFR in the mandible (n = 52), and patients in the active comparator group received a CTC (n = 52). Both groups had a VFR in the maxilla. Dental casts at debond (T1), after 6 months (T2), after 18 months (T3), and after 5 years (T4) were digitized and analysed regarding Little’s Irregularity Index (LII), overbite, overjet, arch length, and intercanine and intermolar width. The patients completed questionnaires at T1, T2, T3, and T4. RESULTS: Post-treatment changes between T1 and T4 in both jaws were overall small. In the maxilla, LII increased significantly (median difference: 0.3 mm), equally in both groups. In the mandible, LII increased significantly in the group VFR/VFR (median difference: 0.6 mm) compared to group VFR/CTC (median difference: 0.1 mm). In both groups, overjet was stable, overbite increased, and arch lengths decreased continuously. Intercanine widths and intermolar width in the mandible remained stable, but intermolar width in the maxilla decreased significantly. No differences were found between groups. Regardless of retention strategy, patients were very satisfied with the treatment outcome and their retention appliances after 5 years. LIMITATIONS: It was not possible to perform blinded assessments of digital models at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Post-treatment changes in both jaws were small. Anterior alignment in the mandible was more stable with a bonded CTC retainer compared to a removable VFR after 5 years of retention. Patients were equally satisfied with fixed and removable retention appliances. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03070444). Oxford University Press 2022-08-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9912701/ /pubmed/35968668 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjac043 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT)
Krämer, Anke
Sjöström, Mats
Apelthun, Catharina
Hallman, Mats
Feldmann, Ingalill
Post-treatment stability after 5 years of retention with vacuum-formed and bonded retainers—a randomized controlled trial
title Post-treatment stability after 5 years of retention with vacuum-formed and bonded retainers—a randomized controlled trial
title_full Post-treatment stability after 5 years of retention with vacuum-formed and bonded retainers—a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Post-treatment stability after 5 years of retention with vacuum-formed and bonded retainers—a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Post-treatment stability after 5 years of retention with vacuum-formed and bonded retainers—a randomized controlled trial
title_short Post-treatment stability after 5 years of retention with vacuum-formed and bonded retainers—a randomized controlled trial
title_sort post-treatment stability after 5 years of retention with vacuum-formed and bonded retainers—a randomized controlled trial
topic Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT)
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9912701/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35968668
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjac043
work_keys_str_mv AT krameranke posttreatmentstabilityafter5yearsofretentionwithvacuumformedandbondedretainersarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT sjostrommats posttreatmentstabilityafter5yearsofretentionwithvacuumformedandbondedretainersarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT apelthuncatharina posttreatmentstabilityafter5yearsofretentionwithvacuumformedandbondedretainersarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT hallmanmats posttreatmentstabilityafter5yearsofretentionwithvacuumformedandbondedretainersarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT feldmanningalill posttreatmentstabilityafter5yearsofretentionwithvacuumformedandbondedretainersarandomizedcontrolledtrial