Abbonarsi

Effect of Direct versus Indirect Bonding Technique on the Failure Rate of Mandibular Fixed Retainer–A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis - 20/11/21

Doi : 10.1016/j.ortho.2021.09.004 
Aqeel Ahmed , Mubassar Fida, Saqib Habib, Faizan Javed, Umair Shoukat Ali
 Section of Dentistry, Department of Surgery, The Aga Khan University Hospital, P.O Box 3500, Stadium Road, 74800 Karachi, Pakistan 

Aqeel Ahmed, Resident Orthodontics, Section of Dentistry, Department of Surgery, The Aga Khan University Hospital, P.O Box 3500, Stadium Road, 74800 Karachi, Pakistan.Resident Orthodontics, Section of Dentistry, Department of Surgery, The Aga Khan University HospitalP.O Box 3500, Stadium RoadKarachi74800Pakistan

Benvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
L'accesso al testo integrale di questo articolo richiede un abbonamento.

pagine 9
Iconografia 3
Video 0
Altro 0

Summary

Introduction

Fixed retainer failure is a common cause of relapse and may require additional orthodontic treatment. The two main methods for bonding the mandibular fixed retainer include direct and indirect techniques. This topic has not been explored previously in a systematic review. Therefore, the objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the effect of direct versus indirect bonding technique on the failure rate of mandibular fixed retainer.

Methods

Online databases (PubMed, Dental and Oral Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus) were systematically searched electronically for articles up until April 2021. Google Scholar and clinicaltrials.gov databases were utilized for hand searching. Randomized, non-randomized clinical trials and cohort studies on human subjects were considered regardless of language or year of publication. Orthodontic patients in their retention phase (mandibular 3×3 fixed retainer), in which the retainer was bonded using direct bonding technique as control and indirect as intervention were included. The outcome assessed was retainer failure rate. Two authors independently examined and extracted the data from the studies that satisfied the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias in clinical trials was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool, whereas risk of bias in cohort studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The meta-analysis was conducted using the RevMan software V.5.3.5.22. The outcome was estimated using weighted average difference and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The studies’ heterogeneity was assessed using Cochrane's heterogeneity test (I2 Test).

Results

Four articles fulfilling the inclusion criteria were included in qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Retainer failure rates were analysed in a total number of 266 patients bonded with mandibular 3×3 retainers after orthodontic therapy. Direct bonding technique of fixed retainer on 131 patients was compared with indirect technique on 135 patients. There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of retainer failure between the two methods (95% CI, 0.67, 1.40).

Conclusions

Within the limitations of insufficient evidence this systematic review and meta-analysis concluded that there is no difference in the failure rate of mandibular fixed retainers between direct and indirect bonding techniques. Due to the scarcity of available data, further studies are needed to establish definitively one's clinical benefit over the other.

Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.

Keywords : Retainers, Fixed, Bonded Retainer, Orthodontics, Direct bonding, Indirect bonding, Shear bond strength, In vivo


Mappa


© 2021  CEO. Pubblicato da Elsevier Masson SAS. Tutti i diritti riservati.
Aggiungere alla mia biblioteca Togliere dalla mia biblioteca Stampare
Esportazione

    Citazioni Export

  • File

  • Contenuto

Vol 19 - N° 4

P. 539-547 - dicembre 2021 Ritorno al numero
Articolo precedente Articolo precedente
  • Is there any difference between conventional, passive and active self-ligating brackets? A systematic review and network meta-analysis
  • Raphaëlle Maizeray, Delphine Wagner, François Lefebvre, Hélène Lévy-Bénichou, Yves Bolender
| Articolo seguente Articolo seguente
  • Radiographic predictors of maxillary canine impaction in mixed and early permanent dentition – A systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Indu Ravi, Bhadrinath Srinivasan, Vignesh Kailasam

Benvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
L'accesso al testo integrale di questo articolo richiede un abbonamento.

Già abbonato a @@106933@@ rivista ?

@@150455@@ Voir plus

Il mio account


Dichiarazione CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM è registrato presso la CNIL, dichiarazione n. 1286925.

Ai sensi della legge n. 78-17 del 6 gennaio 1978 sull'informatica, sui file e sulle libertà, Lei puo' esercitare i diritti di opposizione (art.26 della legge), di accesso (art.34 a 38 Legge), e di rettifica (art.36 della legge) per i dati che La riguardano. Lei puo' cosi chiedere che siano rettificati, compeltati, chiariti, aggiornati o cancellati i suoi dati personali inesati, incompleti, equivoci, obsoleti o la cui raccolta o di uso o di conservazione sono vietati.
Le informazioni relative ai visitatori del nostro sito, compresa la loro identità, sono confidenziali.
Il responsabile del sito si impegna sull'onore a rispettare le condizioni legali di confidenzialità applicabili in Francia e a non divulgare tali informazioni a terzi.


Tutto il contenuto di questo sito: Copyright © 2026 Elsevier, i suoi licenziatari e contributori. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Inclusi diritti per estrazione di testo e di dati, addestramento dell’intelligenza artificiale, e tecnologie simili. Per tutto il contenuto ‘open access’ sono applicati i termini della licenza Creative Commons.