Category Ranking
98%
Total Visits
921
Avg Visit Duration
2 minutes
Citations
20
Article Abstract
Objective: This review aimed at analyzing the literature comparing vacuum-formed retainers and lingual-bonded retainers for maintaining treatment stability and periodontal health and evaluating retainer failure and patient satisfaction.
Methods: Electronic databases such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, Ovid, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched. Only randomized controlled trials were involved. Risk of bias was evaluated using Risk of Bias 2 Tool. Meta-analysis was performed and certainty of evidence was assessed with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.
Results: Five randomized controlled trials were included for qualitative analysis and 2 studies were included for quantitative analysis. Two studies concluded that lingual-bonded retainers were more effective than vacuum-formed retainers in maintaining treatment stability. Two studies had a high risk of bias and 3 studies had some concerns. No statistically significant difference in Little's Irregularity Index (standard mean difference = -0.10; P value = .61), inter-canine width (standard mean difference = 0.66; P value = .09), inter-molar width (standard mean difference = 0.08; P value = .85), arch length (standard mean difference = -0.18; P value = .60) between the 2 retainers was noted. Periodontal status and retainer failure rate (odds ratio= 2.28; P value = .23) were similar in both retainers. Patient discomfort, soreness, and speech difficulty were more with vacuum-formed retainers and oral hygiene maintenance was easier with vacuum-formed retainers.
Conclusion: A very low-level certainty of evidence suggests that both vacuum-formed retainers and lingual-bonded retainers were equally effective in maintaining treatment stability. Periodontal status and retainer failures were similar in both retainers. Vacuum-formed retainers were better for oral hygiene maintenance but were associated with discomfort, soreness, and speech difficulty than lingual-bonded retainers.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9885829 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2022.21169 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Development of professional recommendations on orthodontic retainers: short version.
Orthod Fr
June 2025
Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Département d’ODF, Faculté d’Odontologie, rue Guillaume Paradin, 69372 Lyon cedex 08, France
Introduction: Retention is the set of means, processes or devices that contribute to maintain the teeth in the position and the arches in the shape given by the treatment as long as possible. Given the heterogeneity of practices, devices used and follow-up modalities, the French Society of Dentofacial Orthopedics (Société Française d'Orthopédie Dento-faciale or SFODF), a scientific society, has proposed Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) for orthodontic retention. This article presents the method used to develop the CPG full-text and the guidelines produced.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFClinical Effectiveness of Upper Vacuum-Formed Retainers Used in A Dual Retention Protocol After Orthodontic Treatment: Retainer Failures and Upper Arch Stability. A 24-Month Prospective Cohort Study.
Orthod Craniofac Res
August 2025
Melbourne Dental School, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, Melbourne, Australia.
Objectives: This prospective cohort study aimed to evaluate the number of failures of upper vacuum-formed retainers (VFRs) used in a dual retention protocol and the capacity to maintain upper arch stability 24 months after debonding.
Material And Methods: At the end of orthodontic treatment (T0), 93 consecutive patients (12-25 years) received an upper VFR for night-time use and a fixed retainer. The patients were seen 12 (T1) and 24 months (T2) after debonding.
A randomized controlled trial comparing retainers in bimaxillary proclination cases.
Clin Oral Investig
February 2025
Department of Paediatric Dentistry and Orthodontic, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia.
Introduction: There is currently no recommendation for retaining corrected bimaxillary proclination cases. This study aimed to compare retention protocols for maintaining stability of such cases.
Materials And Methods: In this single-center, single-blinded parallel control trial, 27 participants were assigned to three groups using block randomization with a 1:1:1 allocation ratio; fixed bonded retention (FBR), vacuum-formed retention (VFR), and dual retention (DR) comprising both types.
Impact of simulated gastric acid on the physical and mechanical properties of vacuum-formed retainers: an in vitro study.
BMC Oral Health
February 2025
Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, PO Box 68004, Riyadh, 11527, Saudi Arabia.
Background: A decrease in oral pH levels may have detrimental effects on vacuum-formed retainers since an acidic oral environment could impact the mechanical and physical properties of these retainers. The present In vitro study aimed to evaluate the effect of simulated gastric acid at pH 4 and 1.2 on the surface microhardness, flexural strength, and color change of three different types of orthodontic retainer materials.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFThe influence of 3-dimensional printing layer thickness on model accuracy and the perceived fit of thermoformed retainers.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
April 2025
Department of Orthodontics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH.
Introduction: This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of dental model printing using 2 different layer height settings and how these settings affect the fabrication of thermoformed retainers.
Methods: Subjects were recruited from the Department of Orthodontics at Case Western Reserve University and scanned according to specific selection criteria. A total of 30 stereolithography files were produced and used as reference files.