Hotchandani Kamal Dhruvkumar, Thangadurai Janarthan, Parate Akhilesh Singh, Nixon Jeff Zacharia, Kamble Ranjit H, Meghalapriya P
Department of Dentistry, Pramukh Swami Medical College, Bhaikaka University, Karamsad, Gujarat, India.
Department of Dental Surgery, Kanyakumari Government Medical College, Asaripallam, Kanniyakumari, Tamil Nadu, India.
J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2023 Jul;15(Suppl 1):S502-S507. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_587_22. Epub 2023 Jul 5.
Long-term or even indefinite retention is routinely prescribed after orthodontic treatment as a preventive safeguard against post-treatment changes induced by tooth movement, physiological healing, and the aging process. Though both fixed and removable versions of retainers may be equally effective in terms of results, sufficient research to support this assumption is missing at the moment.
Long-term effects of fixed and removable retention on the periodontium, and the compliance level when used for an extended period of time.
For 4 years participants were given a supply of canine-to-canine retainers and vacuum-formed canine-to-canine retainers. The inter-canine, as well as inter-molar widths, the length, and the extraction space opening of the mandibular anterior portion, were measured. Gingival inflammation, calculus, and plaque were observed, as well as the attachment of clinical and the case of bleeding during probing. 42 members had returned in the follow-up period, with 21 from each of the two groups. Measurements of the modified gingival index and plaque scoring were performed on the 10 intra-oral photographs that were taken at 4-week intervals in this study to investigate the intra-examiner reliability.
After controlling for confounding variables, there was a 1.64 mm (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30, 2.98 mm) median between-groups difference among patients who utilized vacuum-formed retainers (VFRs). The treatment groups did not vary in inter-canine and intermolar widths ( = 0.52; 95% CI, -1.07, 1.05), arch length ( = 0.99; 95% CI, -1.15, 1.14), or opening of extraction spaces ( = 0.84).
A long-term study demonstrates that fixed retention can preserve the alignment of the mandibular anterior over time for the first time. Gingival discomfort and higher plaque scores were reported in both types of retainers.
正畸治疗后通常会常规规定长期甚至无限期佩戴保持器,以预防牙齿移动、生理愈合和衰老过程引起的治疗后变化。尽管固定和可摘两种保持器在效果方面可能同样有效,但目前缺乏足够的研究来支持这一假设。
固定和可摘保持器对牙周组织的长期影响,以及长期使用时的依从性水平。
在4年时间里,为参与者提供犬牙间固定保持器和真空成型犬牙间保持器。测量犬牙间以及磨牙间宽度、下颌前部长度和拔牙间隙开口情况。观察牙龈炎症、牙结石和牙菌斑,以及临床附着情况和探诊时出血情况。随访期有42名成员返回,两组各21名。在本研究中,每隔4周拍摄10张口腔内照片,对改良牙龈指数和菌斑评分进行测量,以研究检查者内部的可靠性。
在控制混杂变量后,使用真空成型保持器(VFRs)的患者组间中位数差异为1.64毫米(95%置信区间[CI],0.30,2.98毫米)。治疗组在犬牙间和磨牙间宽度( = 0.52;95% CI,-1.07,1.05)、牙弓长度( = 0.99;95% CI,-1.15,1.14)或拔牙间隙开口( = 0.84)方面没有差异。
一项长期研究首次表明,固定保持器可长期保持下颌前部的排列整齐。两种类型的保持器均报告有牙龈不适和更高的菌斑评分。