Suppr超能文献

麻花丝固定保持器与螺旋丝及纤维增强复合材料保持器的两年生存率分析:一项初步探索性单盲随机临床试验

Two-year survival analysis of twisted wire fixed retainer versus spiral wire and fiber-reinforced composite retainers: a preliminary explorative single-blind randomized clinical trial.

作者信息

Sobouti Farhad, Rakhshan Vahid, Saravi Mahdi Gholamrezaei, Zamanian Ali, Shariati Mahsa

机构信息

Department of Orthodontics, Dental Faculty, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran.

The Research Council, Iranian Tissue Bank and Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.; Department of Dental Anatomy and Morphology, Dental Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

Korean J Orthod. 2016 Mar;46(2):104-10. doi: 10.4041/kjod.2016.46.2.104. Epub 2016 Mar 18.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Traditional retainers (both metal and fiber-reinforced composite [FRC]) have limitations, and a retainer made from more flexible ligature wires might be advantageous. We aimed to compare an experimental design with two traditional retainers.

METHODS

In this prospective preliminary clinical trial, 150 post-treatment patients were enrolled and randomly divided into three groups of 50 patients each to receive mandibular canine-to-canine retainers made of FRC, flexible spiral wire (FSW), and twisted wire (TW). The patients were monitored monthly. The time at which the first signs of breakage/debonding were detected was recorded. The success rates of the retainers were compared using chi-squared, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox proportional-hazard regression analyses (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

In total, 42 patients in the FRC group, 41 in the FSW group, and 45 in the TW group completed the study. The 2-year failure rates were 35.7% in the FRC group, 26.8% in the FSW group, and 17.8% in the TW group. These rates differed insignificantly (chi-squared p = 0.167). According to the Kaplan-Meier analysis, failure occurred at 19.95 months in the FRC group, 21.37 months in the FSW group, and 22.36 months in the TW group. The differences between the survival rates in the three groups were not significant (Cox regression p = 0.146).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the failure rate of the experimental retainer was two times lower than that of the FRC retainer, the difference was not statistically significant. The experimental TW retainer was successful, and larger studies are warranted to verify these results.

摘要

目的

传统保持器(金属和纤维增强复合材料[FRC])存在局限性,由更灵活的结扎丝制成的保持器可能具有优势。我们旨在将一种实验性设计与两种传统保持器进行比较。

方法

在这项前瞻性初步临床试验中,招募了150名治疗后的患者,并随机分为三组,每组50名患者,分别接受由FRC、柔性螺旋丝(FSW)和绞合丝(TW)制成的下颌尖牙间保持器。每月对患者进行监测。记录检测到首次出现破损/脱粘迹象的时间。使用卡方检验、Kaplan-Meier分析和Cox比例风险回归分析(α = 0.05)比较保持器的成功率。

结果

FRC组共有42名患者、FSW组有41名患者、TW组有45名患者完成了研究。FRC组的2年失败率为35.7%,FSW组为26.8%,TW组为17.8%。这些比率差异不显著(卡方检验p = 0.167)。根据Kaplan-Meier分析,FRC组在19.95个月时出现失败,FSW组在21.37个月时出现失败,TW组在22.36个月时出现失败。三组生存率之间的差异不显著(Cox回归p = 0.146)。

结论

尽管实验性保持器的失败率比FRC保持器低两倍,但差异无统计学意义。实验性TW保持器是成功的,需要更大规模的研究来验证这些结果。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验