Literature DB >> 30778609

Potential impact of lingual retainers on oral health: comparison between conventional twistflex retainers and CAD/CAM fabricated nitinol retainers : A clinical in vitro and in vivo investigation.

I Knaup1, Y Wagner2, J Wego3, U Fritz3, A Jäger4, M Wolf3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of a novel computer-fabricated lingual nitinol retainer compared to a conventional lingual flexible spiral wire twistflex retainer on oral health.
METHODS: The study was based on a retrospective controlled clinical study with pilot character, an in vitro investigation of material-dependent biofilm formation and an analysis of biofilm formation after intraoral incubation. Sixty-one patients with completed fixed orthodontic treatment and retention phase for at least 6 months with twistflex retainers (group 1, n = 31) or computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) nitinol retainers (group 2, n = 30) were included and examined regarding plaque index (PI), gingival index (GI), probing depths, bleeding on probing (BOP) and marginal recessions (MR). Material-dependent biofilm formation of twistflex, untreated nitinol and electropolished nitinol wire samples were assessed (1) in vitro: using optical density (OD) measurement of 10 samples of each and (2) in vivo: using histomorphometric analysis of 18 samples of each.
RESULTS: Patients treated with nitinol retainers had significant better oral health indices (PI1 = 1.29 ± 0.06, PI2 = 0.94 ± 0.06; GI1 = 0.71 ± 0.05, GI2 = 0.56 ± 0.04; BOP1 = 0.11 ± 0.01, BOP2 = 0.08 ± 0.01; PD1 = 1.79 ± 0.03 mm, PD2 = 1.59 ± 0.04 mm) except for MR (0.08 ± 0.03 mm versus 0.08 ± 0.02 mm) compared to twistflex retainers. After 24 h intraoral incubation nitinol retainers demonstrated significant less biofilm formation compared to twistflex retainers. In the in vitro investigation the temporary significant differences between the groups were compensated in the end.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results it can be assumed that nitinol-made CAD/CAM developed lingual retainers have a positive effect on oral health.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biofilm; Dental plaque; Gingival bleeding on probing; Gingival diseases; Oral health; Orthodontic appliances

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30778609     DOI: 10.1007/s00056-019-00169-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orofac Orthop        ISSN: 1434-5293            Impact factor:   1.938


  5 in total

1.  Comparative assessment of relapse and failure between CAD/CAM stainless steel and standard stainless steel fixed retainers in orthodontic retention patients.

Authors:  Hun Shim; Patrick Foley; Brent Bankhead; Ki Beom Kim
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 2.079

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

Authors:  Emilie Gelin; Laurence Seidel; Annick Bruwier; Adelin Albert; Carole Charavet
Journal:  Korean J Orthod       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 1.372

Review 3.  Efficacy of CAD/CAM Technology in Interventions Implemented in Orthodontics: A Scoping Review of Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Carlos M Ardila; Andrés Elorza-Durán; Daniel Arrubla-Escobar
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2022-06-02       Impact factor: 3.246

4.  Post-treatment Stability in Orthodontic Retention with Twistflex Retainers-Do Patients Benefit from Additional Removable Retainers?

Authors:  Isabel Knaup; Ulrike Schulte; Jenny Rosa Bartz; Christian Niederau; Rogerio Bastos Craveiro; Andreas Jäger; Michael Wolf
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 3.606

5.  Clinical Study on Efficiency of Using Traditional Direct Bonding or OrthGuide Computer-Aided Indirect Bonding in Orthodontic Patients.

Authors:  Min Wang; Xing Shi; Wei-Pu Cheng; Fei-Hu Ma; Si-Miao Cheng; Xuan Kang
Journal:  Dis Markers       Date:  2022-09-29       Impact factor: 3.464

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.