ArticleBMC oral health2022
Survival analysis of three types of maxillary and mandibular bonded orthodontic retainers: a retrospective cohort.
Article in BMC oral health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of quality of life and periodontal health with an eight-unit maxillary fixed retainer through a prospective clinical trial.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Assessment of the unwanted tooth movement associated with an extended maxillary fixed retainer (3D analysis).BMC oral health · 2024Trial
- Wire Syndrome Associated with Multistrand Orthodontic Retainers: A Proposed Etiopathogenic Concept.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- The Micromechanical Properties and Surface Roughness of Orthodontic Retainer Wires-An In Vitro Analysis.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Orthodontic Retainers-A Critical Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Relapse and inadvertent tooth movement post orthodontic treatment in individuals with fixed retainers: A review.Revista cientifica odontologica (Universidad Cientifica del Sur)Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRetention is an important aspect of orthodontic treatment. This study aimed to analyze the survival of three types of maxillary and mandibular bonded orthodontic retainers.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study evaluated the records of 118 orthodontic patients (90 females, 28 males, mean age of 22.34 ± 6.44 years) retrieved from a private orthodontic office. Data regarding the retainer failure, dental caries, unwanted tooth movements, maximum pocket depth (PD), and bleeding on probing (BOP) recorded at the follow-up sessions were extracted from patient records. Three types of retainer wires namely Bond-A-Braid, Orthoflex, and Retainium were compared regarding the abovementioned parameters. Data were analyzed by ANOVA, Chi-square, Monte-Carlo Chi-square, and Kruskal Wallis tests, the log rank test, and the Cox regression model.
resultsThe frequency of retainer failure was not significantly different between males and females, different age groups, or different treatment durations (P > 0.05). Wire fracture was the most common failure type in both the maxilla and mandible. Also, the frequency of failure was not significantly different between the maxillary and mandibular retainers (P > 0.05). The frequency of failure, and survival of the three types of retainer wires were not significantly different during a 5-year period (P > 0.05).
conclusionsThe three types of orthodontic retainers had comparable survival rates. Their failure rate was not correlated with the age or gender of patients or the treatment duration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.