ArticleTurkish journal of orthodontics2024
Comparing the Impact of Titanium and Stainless Steel Retainers on Lower Incisor Stability, Periodontal Health, and Retainer Survival: A Preliminary Study.
Article in Turkish journal of orthodontics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparison of the biomechanical properties of CAD/CAM individualized lingual retainers: AnKorean journal of orthodontics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to compare the impact of titanium and stainless steel (SS) retainer wires on lower incisor stability and periodontal health. Methods: Fifty patients between the ages of 14.1 and 29.5 years were recruited for the study. The impact of 0.027x0.011-inch rectangular titanium dead-soft wire retainers was compared with that of 0.0215-inch six-stranded SS wire retainers. The retainers were bonded to the mandibular arch, and 3D models were evaluated after completion of the orthodontic treatment (T1), at the third month (T2), and at the sixth month (T3). Little's irregularity index (LII), the intercanine width, the pocket depth, the plaque index, bleeding on probing, and retainer survival were analyzed. The generalized linear model method was used to compare scores on LII, the intercanine width, the pocket depth, and plaque index values. Cochran's Q test was used to compare intragroup bleeding. Results: A significant increase was found in the irregularity index parameter according to time (p=0.004) but no statistically significant difference was found between groups in terms of the LII according to material and time (p=0.826). No significant difference was found in intercanine width parameters between the groups according to material and time (p=0.977). No statistically significant difference was found between the groups in terms of pocket depth and plaque index scores, according to material and time. No retainer failure was observed in either group. Conclusion: Both retainer wires offer successful results in terms of stability parameters and periodontal parameters after six months.
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.