Al-Nimri Kazem, Al Habashneh Rola, Obeidat Mohammed
Department of Orthodontics, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Jordan.
Aust Orthod J. 2009 Nov;25(2):142-6.
Different types and diameters of wire are used in bonded lingual retainers. Some clinicians bond a small diameter multistrand wire to each tooth, while other clinicians bond a large diameter wire to the lingual surfaces of the lower canines.
To compare the gingival health, plaque accumulation, tooth stability and integrity of multistrand wire and round wire bonded lingual retainers.
Sixty-two subjects, who had completed treatment and who required fixed retention for the lower anterior segment, were assigned to either the Round wire retainer group or the Multistrand wire retainer group. In the Round wire retainer group, a 0.036 inch round, stainless steel wire was bonded to the lingual surfaces of both lower canines. The Multistrand retainer group had a 0.015 inch multistrand wire bonded to the lingual surfaces of all lower anterior teeth. At least 12 months after debonding, the subjects were recalled and the following variables were recorded: Oral Hygiene Index (OHI), Plaque Index (PI) of the lower anterior teeth, Gingival Index (GI) of the lower anterior teeth, Irregularity Index (IRI) of the lower anterior teeth, and the number of broken retainers.
There were no significant differences between the PI (p = 0.165) and GI (p = 0.150) of the two groups. More plaque was found on the distal surfaces of the lower anterior teeth in the group with multistrand wire retainers (p = 0.02). The lower anterior teeth were significantly more irregular in the group with round wire retainers compared to the group with multistrand wire retainers (p = 0.002). Although the multistrand wire retainers fractured more frequently than the round wire retainers the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.325).
More plaque accumulated on the distal surfaces of the lower anterior teeth in subjects with multistrand wire retainers than in subjects with round wire retainers. Multistrand wire retainers were better at maintaining incisor alignment than single span, round wire retainers.
粘结式舌侧保持器使用不同类型和直径的钢丝。一些临床医生将小直径多股钢丝粘结到每颗牙齿上，而其他临床医生则将大直径钢丝粘结到下颌尖牙的舌面。
比较多股钢丝和圆形钢丝粘结式舌侧保持器的牙龈健康状况、菌斑堆积情况、牙齿稳定性和完整性。
62名已完成治疗且需要对下前牙段进行固定保持的受试者被分为圆形钢丝保持器组或多股钢丝保持器组。在圆形钢丝保持器组中，将一根0.036英寸的圆形不锈钢丝粘结到两颗下颌尖牙的舌面。多股钢丝保持器组将一根0.015英寸的多股钢丝粘结到所有下前牙的舌面。在拆除矫治器至少12个月后，召回受试者并记录以下变量：口腔卫生指数（OHI）、下前牙的菌斑指数（PI）、下前牙的牙龈指数（GI）、下前牙的不齐指数（IRI）以及保持器折断的数量。
两组的PI（p = 0.165）和GI（p = 0.150）无显著差异。多股钢丝保持器组在下前牙远中面发现更多菌斑（p = 0.02）。与多股钢丝保持器组相比，圆形钢丝保持器组的下前牙不齐程度明显更高（p = 0.002）。尽管多股钢丝保持器比圆形钢丝保持器更容易折断，但差异无统计学意义（p = 0.325）。
多股钢丝保持器受试者下前牙远中面的菌斑堆积比圆形钢丝保持器受试者更多。多股钢丝保持器在维持切牙排列整齐方面比单跨度圆形钢丝保持器更好。
