Clinical and radiographic comparison of the effects of two types of fixed retainers on periodontium - A randomized clinical trial

Background: Most orthodontists believe that fixed retainers are necessary to maintain ideal dental relationships. However, untoward side effects might result from their long-term placement. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic effect of two commonly used fixed retainers on the health of the periodontium. Methods: Thirty patients were randomly divided into two groups to receive either a fiber-reinforced composite retainer or a spiral wire retainer extended on the lingual surfaces of both maxillary and mandibular arches from canine to canine. Periapical radiographs were obtained from the patients at the time of placement of the retainers and after the 6-month period to assess the radiographic conditions of the periodontium. Clinical examination was carried out at the same two time intervals. Results: Even though there were no significant differences between the two groups of study at the beginning of the trial, there were statistically significant differences after the 6-month follow-up regarding the main outcomes of the study. Nearly all indices showed to deteriorate after 6 months in the fiber-reinforced group, while in the spiral wire group, this was not the case. As for the secondary outcomes, radiographic examination did not reveal any statistically significant differences after 6 months or between the two groups. Conclusions: It can be concluded that spiral wire retainers elicit less detrimental periodontal response in the short-term follow-up compared to fiber-reinforced composite retainers as revealed by the primary outcomes of the study

Comparação de parâmetros periodontais após utilização de contenção ortodôntica com fio trançado e contenção modificada Comparison of periodontal parameters after the use of orthodontic multi-stranded wire retainers and modified retainers

OBJETIVO: o presente estudo teve como objetivo comparar dois tipos de contenções ortodônticas fixas, em relação a parâmetros periodontais estabelecidos. A contenção com fio trançado é a mais comumente utilizada e a contenção modificada apresenta dobras que têm a finalidade de permitir o livre acesso do fio dental às áreas interproximais. MÉTODOS: para esse estudo cruzado, foram selecionados 12 voluntários que utilizaram, por 6 meses, A) Contenção com fio trançado e B) Contenção modificada - sendo essas fixadas em todos os dentes do segmento anterior. Após esse período experimental, foram feitas as seguintes avaliações: Índice de Placa Dentária, Índice Gengival, Índice de Cálculo Dentário e Índice de Cálculo ao longo do fio de contenção. Os voluntários também responderam a um questionário com relação à utilização, conforto e higienização das contenções. RESULTADOS: foi observado que o índice de placa e o índice gengival foram maiores nas faces linguais (p<0,05) para a contenção modificada. Além disso, o índice de cálculo foi estatisticamente maior (p<0,05) considerando-se as faces linguais e proximais na utilização da contenção modificada. O índice de cálculo ao longo do fio também apresentou valores significativamente maiores (p<0,05) na contenção modificada. Em relação ao questionário, 58% dos voluntários consideraram que a contenção modificada é mais desconfortável; e 54% deles preferiram a contenção com fio trançado. CONCLUSÃO: a partir dos resultados obtidos, pode-se concluir que a contenção com fio trançado apresentou melhores resultados do que a contenção modificada, de acordo com os parâmetros periodontais avaliados, além de apresentar maior conforto e preferência na sua utilização.<br>OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to compare two types of fixed orthodontic retainers (a multi-stranded wire retainer and a modified retainer) in relation to established periodontal parameters. The multi-stranded wire retainer is commonly used, and the modified retainer has bends to enable free access of dental floss to interproximal areas. METHODS: For this crossover study, 12 volunteers were selected and used the following retainers for six months: (A) a multi-stranded wire retainer and (B) a modified retainer. Both retainers were fixed to all anterior lower teeth.After this experimental period, the following evaluations were made: Dental Plaque Index, Gingival Index, Dental Calculus Index and Retainer Wire Calculus Index. The volunteers also responded to a questionnaire about the use, comfort and hygiene of the retainers. RESULTS: It was observed that the plaque index and the gingival index were higher on the lingual surface (p<0.05) for the modified retainer. Furthermore, the calculus index was statistically higher (p<0.05) for the lingual and proximal surfaces when using the modified retainer. The retainer wire calculus index values were also significantly higher (p<0.05) for the modified retainer. In the questionnaire, 58% of the volunteers considered the modified retainer to be less comfortable and 54% of them preferred the multi-stranded wire retainer. CONCLUSION: From the results obtained, it could be concluded that the multi-stranded wire retainer showed better results than the modified retainer according to the periodontal parameters evaluated, as well as providing greater comfort and being the retainer preferred by the volunteers