Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37266911›Full record

ArticleJournal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie2025

Investigation of the cleaning performance of commercial orthodontic cleaning tablets regarding biofilm removal on PMMA test specimens : An ex vivo study.

A Arndt-Fink, P-G Jost-Brinkmann

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

A Arndt-FinkCharitéCenter 3 for Oral Health Sciences (CC 3), Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Aßmannshauser Str. 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Germany. alice.arndt93@googlemail.com.
P-G Jost-BrinkmannCharitéCenter 3 for Oral Health Sciences (CC 3), Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Aßmannshauser Str. 4-6, 14197, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this ex vivo study was to compare the cleaning performance of three commercially available orthodontic cleaners on polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) test specimens covered with biofilm.

methodsTwenty subjects wore an individually manufactured vacuum-formed maxillary splint with four integrated PMMA test specimens for 7 days. The four test specimens were located on the buccal surfaces of the maxillary molars. After a 7-day wearing period, the PMMA test specimens colonized by biofilm were divided into two halves. One half was placed in 150 ml of tap water or in 150 ml of cleaning solution of the cleaners Retainer Brite® (Dentsply International Raintree Essix, Sarasota, FL, USA), Kukis® Xpress (Reckitt Benckiser, Heidelberg, Germany) or Dontodent (Propack, Heidelberg, Germany) while the other half remained uncleaned. The modified o‑phthaldialdehyde (OPA) method was used to determine the amount of protein on both halves of the test specimens. The difference was tested for significance as a measure of the cleaning effect using a paired sample t‑test.

resultsThe cleaning performance of the three orthodontic cleaners was higher than the cleaning performance of tap water (mean 25.9 ± 6.5%). While Retainer Brite® (mean 54.5 ± 7.1%) removed significantly more biofilm than Dontodent (mean 41.5 ± 9.2%, p < 0.001) and Kukis® Xpress (mean 39.9 ± 11.5%, p < 0.001), there was no significant difference in the cleaning performance between Kukis® Xpress and Dontodent (p = 1).

conclusionSeven-day-old biofilm is only removed partially by the investigated orthodontic cleaners, so that they are not suitable as the only measure for removing established biofilms.

Indexed as

BiofilmsOrthodontic AppliancesPolymethyl MethacrylateAdultFemaleHumansMalePolymethyl MethacrylateDenture hygieneo‑phthaldialdehyde (OPA) methodPolymethyl methacrylateRemovable orthodontic appliancesRemoval of biofilms

Identifiers

PMID37266911
PMCPMC11861341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.