Trial reportEuropean journal of orthodontics2023
Post-treatment stability after 5 years of retention with vacuum-formed and bonded retainers-a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in European journal of orthodontics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03070444 (Vacuum-formed Retainer Versus Bonded Retainer to Prevent Relapse After Orthodontic Treatment - A Randomized Controlled Trial About Stability and Patients' Perceptions), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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.
Vacuum-formed Retainer Versus Bonded Retainer to Prevent Relapse After Orthodontic Treatment - A Randomized Controlled Trial About Stability and Patients' Perceptions
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Which orthodontic retainer provides the best stabilization? : Systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2026Pooled it
- Analysis of quality of life and periodontal health with an eight-unit maxillary fixed retainer through a prospective clinical trial.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Stability of maxillary anterior teeth during retention and 1 year after removal of retention-an RCT on adolescents retained with two different bonded retainers and a vacuum-formed retainer.European journal of orthodontics · 2023Trial
- Forces and Moments Generated by Thermoforming Aligners and Direct-Printed Aligners: A Systematic Review.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Strategies for improving compliance with removable retention appliances: A qualitative study.Journal of orthodontics · 2026Article
- Effect of Bonding Height on Force-Moment Generation in Orthodontic Fixed Lingual Retainers: An In Vitro Study.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2026Article
- Analysis of predictive factors for post-orthodontic stability: a retrospective cohort study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Retention preferences and protocols of Brazilian orthodontists: a cross-sectional study.Dental press journal of orthodontics · 2024Article
- Catalpol Enhances Osteogenic Differentiation of Human Periodontal Stem Cells and Modulates Periodontal Tissue Remodeling in an Orthodontic Tooth Movement Rat Model.Drug design, development and therapy · 2024Article
- Keeping the teeth in line: Exploring the necessity of bonded retainers in orthodontics: A narrative review.Journal of orthodontic science · 2024Review
- Striving for Perfection: How Stable Is Orthodontic Treatment When Excellent Outcomes Are Achieved? A 9-Year Post-Treatment Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRetention after orthodontic treatment is still a challenge and more evidence about post-treatment stability and patients' perceptions of different retention strategies is needed.
objectivesThis trial compares removable vacuum-formed retainers (VFR) with bonded cuspid-to-cuspid retainers (CTC) after 5 years of retention. TRIAL
designA single centre two-arm parallel-group randomized controlled trial.
methodsThis trial included 104 adolescent patients, randomized into two groups (computer-generated), using sequentially numbered, opaque, and sealed envelopes. All patients were treated with fixed appliances in both jaws with and without tooth extractions. Patients in the intervention group received a VFR in the mandible (n = 52), and patients in the active comparator group received a CTC (n = 52). Both groups had a VFR in the maxilla. Dental casts at debond (T1), after 6 months (T2), after 18 months (T3), and after 5 years (T4) were digitized and analysed regarding Little's Irregularity Index (LII), overbite, overjet, arch length, and intercanine and intermolar width. The patients completed questionnaires at T1, T2, T3, and T4.
resultsPost-treatment changes between T1 and T4 in both jaws were overall small. In the maxilla, LII increased significantly (median difference: 0.3 mm), equally in both groups. In the mandible, LII increased significantly in the group VFR/VFR (median difference: 0.6 mm) compared to group VFR/CTC (median difference: 0.1 mm). In both groups, overjet was stable, overbite increased, and arch lengths decreased continuously. Intercanine widths and intermolar width in the mandible remained stable, but intermolar width in the maxilla decreased significantly. No differences were found between groups. Regardless of retention strategy, patients were very satisfied with the treatment outcome and their retention appliances after 5 years. LIMITATIONS: It was not possible to perform blinded assessments of digital models at follow-up.
conclusionsPost-treatment changes in both jaws were small. Anterior alignment in the mandible was more stable with a bonded CTC retainer compared to a removable VFR after 5 years of retention. Patients were equally satisfied with fixed and removable retention appliances.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03070444).
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.