Failure of fixed orthodontic retainers: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the risk of failure of fixed orthodontic retention protocols. DATA Screening for inclusion eligibility, quality assessment of studies and data extraction was performed independently by two authors. SOURCES The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were searched with no restrictions on publication date or language using detailed strategies. The main outcome assessed was bond failure. STUDY SELECTION Twenty-seven studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. Randomised controlled trials and prospective studies were evaluated according to the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Retrospective studies were graded employing the predetermined criteria of Bondemark. RESULTS Nine randomised controlled trials, four of which were of low quality, were identified. Six studies had a prospective design and all were of low quality. Twelve studies were retrospective. The quality of trial reporting was poor in general. Four studies assessing glass-fibre retainers, three RCTs and one prospective, reported bond failures from 11 to 71%, whereas twenty studies evaluating multistranded retainers – nine RCTs, two prospective and nine retrospective – reported failures ranging from 12 to 50%. One comparison was performed, multistranded wires vs. polyehtylene woven ribbon (RR: 1.74; 95% CI: 0.45, 6.73; p=0.42). CONCLUSION The quality of the available evidence is low. No conclusive evidence was found in order to guide orthodontists in the selection of the best protocol. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Although fixed orthodontic retainers have been used for years in clinical practice, the selection of the best treatment protocol still remains a subjective issue. The available studies, and their synthesis, cannot provide reliable evidence in this field.

Effect of chin-cup treatment on the temporomandibular joint: a systematic review

AIM To systematically search the literature and assess the available evidence for the influence of chin-cup therapy on the temporomandibular joint regarding morphological adaptations and appearance of temporomandibular disorders (TMD). MATERIALS AND METHODS Electronic database searches of published and unpublished literature were performed. The following electronic databases with no language and publication date restrictions were searched: MEDLINE (via Ovid and PubMed), EMBASE (via Ovid), the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, and CENTRAL. Unpublished literature was searched on ClinicalTrials.gov, the National Research Register, and Pro-Quest Dissertation Abstracts and Thesis database. The reference lists of all eligible studies were checked for additional studies. Two review authors performed data extraction independently and in duplicate using data collection forms. Disagreements were resolved by discussion or the involvement of an arbiter. RESULTS From the 209 articles identified, 55 papers were considered eligible for inclusion in the review. Following the full text reading stage, 12 studies qualified for the final review analysis. No randomized clinical trial was identified. Eight of the included studies were of prospective and four of retrospective design. All studies were assessed for their quality and graded eventually from low to medium level of evidence. Based on the reported evidence, chin-cup therapy affects the condylar growth pattern, even though two studies reported no significance changes in disc position and arthrosis configuration. Concerning the incidence of TMD, it can be concluded from the available evidence that chin-cup therapy constitutes no risk factor for TMD. CONCLUSION Based on the available evidence, chin-cup therapy for Class III orthodontic anomaly seems to induce craniofacial adaptations. Nevertheless, there are insufficient or low-quality data in the orthodontic literature to allow the formulation of clear statements regarding the influence of chin-cup treatment on the temporomandibular joint.