-
Biomedicines May 2024Fixed appliance (FA) therapy predisposes patients to white spot lesions (WSLs). The F-ACP complex (amorphous calcium phosphate nanoparticles enriched with carbonate and...
Fixed appliance (FA) therapy predisposes patients to white spot lesions (WSLs). The F-ACP complex (amorphous calcium phosphate nanoparticles enriched with carbonate and fluorine and coated with citrate) has been effective for in vitro enamel remineralization. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the F-ACP complex in remineralizing WSLs after FA therapy. One hundred and six adolescents (aged 12-20 years) were randomized into study and control groups after FA therapy. Patients in the study group were advised to use dental mousse containing F-ACP applied within Essix retainers for six months. The presence of WSLs was recorded at baseline (T0), 3 months (T1), and 6 months (T2) according to the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS). Visual Plaque Index (VPI) and Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI) were recorded. Among 106 study participants, 91 (52 and 39 in study and control groups, respectively) completed the study. The results showed that the ICDAS score was significantly lower ( < 0.001) in the study group than in the control group between T0 and T2. The application of mousse containing the F-ACP complex inside Essix retainers for six months is effective in remineralizing white spot lesions in patients after FA therapy without side effects.
PubMed: 38927409
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines12061202 -
Journal of Pharmacy & Bioallied Sciences Apr 2024The current study was conducted with the aim of evaluating the retention protocol followed by orthodontists in India.
AIM
The current study was conducted with the aim of evaluating the retention protocol followed by orthodontists in India.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A cross-sectional web-based questionnaire survey was carried out to evaluate the retention protocol. To determine the sample size, a pilot study was carried out, and the final sample arrived was 250 subjects. The current study's inclusion criteria took into account those who had finished their BDS&MDS (Orthodontist).
RESULTS
The data were statistically examined when the surveys were received and completed. The choice for fixed retainers was 67.4%. Retainer wear time preferences ranged widely, with 60% preferring 12-18 hours. The initial post-retention check appointment was planned by the majority of orthodontists (47.6%) within the next three months. Recall appointments for retention checks were only planned by the majority of orthodontists (56.3%) once every three months. Regular involvement by patients at their retention check appointments was (38%).
CONCLUSION
The most commonly used and preferred type of retainer is fixed retainer, and dentist preferences range around 12-18 hours of wear time. Furthermore, the duration of the retainer wear preferred by most orthodontists/dentists is 10 months to 2 years.
PubMed: 38882740
DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1099_23 -
Journal of Orthodontics Jun 2024New technologies have paved the way for newer fabrication techniques, such as rapid prototyping, which has gained popularity in the fabrication of several orthodontic...
BACKGROUND
New technologies have paved the way for newer fabrication techniques, such as rapid prototyping, which has gained popularity in the fabrication of several orthodontic appliances including retainers.
AIM
To evaluate the stability, survival time and periodontal health associated with vacuum-formed retainers (VFRs), bonded retainers (BRs) and rapid prototype retainers (RPRs) over a period of 12 months in retention.
STUDY DESIGN
Prospective clinical study.
METHODS
A total of 72 participants completing fixed orthodontic treatment were allocated to the following three groups by the investigators based upon their initial malocclusion, compliant and preferences: VFR; BR; and RPR. The primary outcome was Little's Irregularity Index (LII). Other stability parameters, including arch length (AL), inter-canine width (ICW) and inter-molar width (IMW), were also assessed immediately after debonding (T0) and 12 months (T2) after debonding. In addition, survival time, and calculus index and gingival index (GI) were assessed.
RESULTS
LII showed a significant difference ( = 0.00) between the groups and was increased in the VFR group (0.18 ± 0.22 mm) compared to the BR (0.03 ± 0.05 mm) and RPR (0.01 ± 0.03 mm) groups but was not clinically significant. The mean survival time of maxillary retainers was longest for the RPR group (220.63 days; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 194.1-247.16) but there was no significant difference between the three groups ( = 0.43). The mean survival time of mandibular retainers was higher and the same for the VFR and RPR groups (240 days; 95% CI = 240-240) and there was no significant difference between the three groups ( = 0.38). The calculus index score ( = 0.00) was statistically significant between the groups, with an increased score for the BR group (0.33 ± 0.27) compared to the VFR (0.07 ± 0.16) and RPR (0.13 ± 0.22) groups. Similarly, the GI score ( = 0.02) was statistically significant between the groups and was increased in the BR group (0.01 ± 0.19) compared to the VFR (-0.15 ± 0.18) and RPR (-0.06 ± 0.15) groups. The increase in calculus index and GI scores for the BR group were not clinically significant.
CONCLUSION
There were no clinically significant differences between the three retainer groups in terms of stability, periodontal health and time to failure.
PubMed: 38859624
DOI: 10.1177/14653125241255702 -
BMC Oral Health Jun 2024Clinicians often utilize both flowable and packable composites concurrently in bonding fixed retainers. Thus, this study aimed to assess the synergistic effect of these...
BACKGROUND
Clinicians often utilize both flowable and packable composites concurrently in bonding fixed retainers. Thus, this study aimed to assess the synergistic effect of these composites in the bonding process.
METHODS
This in vitro study divided specimens into three groups: flowable composite (nano-hybrid, Tetric N-Flow, Ivoclar Vivadent), packable composite (nano-hybrid, Tetric N-ceram, Ivoclar Vivadent), and combined use of flowable and packable composite. Shear bond strength (SBS), adhesive remnant index (ARI), and wire pull-out resistance were compared among the groups. Statistical analyses were conducted using ANOVA and Tukey tests to compare study groups. Additionally, Chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests were employed to analyze the ARI index among the groups.
RESULTS
ANOVA results indicated no statistically significant differences among test groups (P = 0.129) regarding SBS. However, a significant difference existed between flowable and packable composite groups (P = 0.01) regarding ARI scores. Among the study groups, flowable composite exhibited the highest frequencies of ARI scores of 1 and 2, whereas packable composite showed the highest frequency of ARI scores of 0. The combined group had higher frequencies of ARI scores of 0 and 1 compared to the flowable composite. The wire pull-out test revealed that the combined application of flowable and packable composite resulted in significantly lower detachments compared to the packable composite alone (P = 0.008). However, no significant differences were observed in the comparisons between the flowable-packable (P = 0.522) and combined-flowable (P = 0.128) groups.
CONCLUSION
The combined use of flowable and packable composites for fixed retainers demonstrated adequate shear bond strength and ideal ARI scores, suggesting it as a suitable adhesive system for bonding orthodontic fixed retainers.
Topics: Composite Resins; Orthodontic Retainers; In Vitro Techniques; Shear Strength; Materials Testing; Dental Bonding; Dental Stress Analysis; Humans
PubMed: 38858745
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-04437-w -
The International Journal of... May 2024Bonded fixed retainers are frequently used nowadays as the main and often the only retention protocol after orthodontic treatment. The expectations for long-lasting...
Bonded fixed retainers are frequently used nowadays as the main and often the only retention protocol after orthodontic treatment. The expectations for long-lasting lifetime stability of the occlusion led orthodontists to seek the ultimate retention protocol with minimal patient compliance. Fixed retainers have many disadvantages and risks that should be considered in advance. Different failures of fixed retainers are described and categorized. The workflow for the retreatment of relapse caused in spite of the fixed retainers is described with 3 case presentations: Open bite, Root movement and Bimaxillary protrusion, all treated with clear aligner treatment (CAT). A revised retention protocol is suggested.
PubMed: 38820276
DOI: 10.11607/prd.7083 -
British Dental Journal May 2024
Topics: Humans; Orthodontic Retainers
PubMed: 38789735
DOI: 10.1038/s41415-024-7465-x -
Journal of Functional Biomaterials May 2024The objective of this study was to explore the effects of fixed orthodontic appliances on enamel structure by assessing microfractures, surface roughness, and... (Review)
Review
AIM
The objective of this study was to explore the effects of fixed orthodontic appliances on enamel structure by assessing microfractures, surface roughness, and alterations in color.
METHODS
This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A systematic search of online databases was conducted using the keywords 'enamel' AND 'orthodontic debonding'. Eligibility criteria included both in vivo and ex vivo clinical trials conducted on human teeth.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A total of 14 relevant papers were analyzed. Various instruments and techniques were utilized across different studies to assess surface roughness, color change, and surface fractures.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings of this study suggest that ceramic brackets may lead to an increase in enamel fractures, particularly during bracket removal. The surface roughness of enamel exhibits variability depending on the adhesive substance and polishing methods used post-removal. Fixed orthodontic appliances could induce changes in enamel color, which may be alleviated by the use of nano-hydroxyapatite or specific polishing techniques. Further research is necessary to identify effective strategies for managing these color changes and improving the overall outcomes of fixed orthodontic treatment.
PubMed: 38786634
DOI: 10.3390/jfb15050123 -
Journal of Orthodontic Science 2024In most recent studies, long-term retention after orthodontic treatment has been hypothesized that may be necessary to maintain the stability of the dentition and avoid... (Review)
Review
In most recent studies, long-term retention after orthodontic treatment has been hypothesized that may be necessary to maintain the stability of the dentition and avoid post-treatment changes. The bonded fixed retainer is characterized by its clinical effectiveness, patient acceptance, and lack of patient complaints as compared with a removable retainer. An electronic database (such as PubMed, PubMed Central, Web of Science, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and ResearchGate) has been collected using specific keywords. Of the 152 articles, only randomized clinical trials that investigated different types of fixed retainers or compared fixed with removable retainers were illustrated in tables and included in this review. The present review has gone some way towards enhancing our understanding of the bonded fixed retainer, types, material, bonding methods, and how to improve its the success rate, besides the importance of new technology in fixed orthodontic retention.
PubMed: 38784083
DOI: 10.4103/jos.jos_159_23 -
Polymers May 2024Polyetheretherketone (PEEK), an organic thermoplastic polymer, has gained interest in dentistry due to its excellent mechanical strength, flexibility, and... (Review)
Review
Polyetheretherketone (PEEK), an organic thermoplastic polymer, has gained interest in dentistry due to its excellent mechanical strength, flexibility, and biocompatibility. Furthermore, the ability to utilize CAD/CAM in the fabrication of PEEK enhances accuracy, reliability, and efficiency while also saving time. Hence, several orthodontic studies have explored the utilization of PEEK in various applications, such as archwires, brackets, fixed lingual retainers, palatal expansion devices, transpalatal arches, Tübingen palatal plates, different types of space maintainers, mini-implant insertion guides, and more. However, a complete systematic review of the available data comparing the performance of PEEK with traditional orthodontic materials has not yet been conducted. Therefore, this systematic review seeks to assess if PEEK material meets the required mechanical criteria to serve as an alternative to conventional orthodontic appliances. To ensure clarity and precision, this review will specifically concentrate on fixed appliances. This systemic review followed the PRISMA guidelines and utilized databases including PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Springer, Web of Science, and Wiley. Searches were restricted to English language articles from January 2013 to February 2024. Keywords such as "Polyetheretherketone" or "PEEK" and "Orthodontic" or "Orthodontic device" or "Orthodontic materials" were employed across all databases. Nine studies were incorporated, covering orthodontic archwires, brackets, and fixed lingual retainers. Based on the reviewed literature, PEEK demonstrates promising potential in orthodontic fixed appliances, offering advantages in force delivery, friction reduction, and aesthetic appeal. Further research is needed to fully explore its capabilities and optimize its application in clinical practice.
PubMed: 38732740
DOI: 10.3390/polym16091271 -
American Journal of Orthodontics and... Jul 2024The purpose of this study was to examine the use of orthodontic 3-dimensional (3D) printing technology in North America and to understand why orthodontists are, or are...
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this study was to examine the use of orthodontic 3-dimensional (3D) printing technology in North America and to understand why orthodontists are, or are not, incorporating 3D printing technology in their practices.
METHODS
A survey questionnaire was delivered on a secure online platform, RedCap (Case Western Reserve University Clinical and Translational Science Award; no. UL1TR002548). The survey consisted of 14-34 items with branching logic. The association between participant demographics and in-house 3D printing was assessed using a chi-square test of independence.
RESULTS
A total of 518 responses were recorded. The highest number of responses came from respondents in the 36-45-year age group. Most of the respondents were practice owners; 46.9% had 3D printers in their office. Chi-square tests of independence were performed on the data to see which associations existed. The strongest statistical associations with using an in-house 3D printer are seen with patient load, practice type, years since residency, and orthodontist's position.
CONCLUSIONS
Approximately 75% of orthodontists use 3D printing technology in some capacity in North America. Major factors that influenced orthodontists to incorporate 3D printing technology into their office were self-interest and research. Major factors that have prevented orthodontists from not incorporating 3D printing technology into their office were space for equipment/ventilation and digital workflow training deficit. Orthodontists use their 3D printers mostly to make plastic retainers from printed models. The strongest associations with using in-house 3D printers are seen in patient load, practice type, years since residency, and orthodontist position. Increasing patient load and being in private practice increases the likelihood of having a 3D printer.
Topics: Printing, Three-Dimensional; Humans; North America; Orthodontics; Adult; Male; Female; Middle Aged; Surveys and Questionnaires; Practice Patterns, Dentists'; Dental Offices; Young Adult
PubMed: 38678454
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2024.03.014