SynthesisBMC oral health2025
Impact of bonding protocols and physical-mechanical properties of composite on durability and failure rate of fixed orthodontic retainers: a systematic review of laboratory studies.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2025. 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.
- Wire Syndrome Associated with Multistrand Orthodontic Retainers: A Proposed Etiopathogenic Concept.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdhesive failure is the most common complication in fixed orthodontic retention. Understanding the mechanical properties of composites used in bonding fixed retainers and finding proper bonding protocols are essential to achieve proper durability of the adhesive interface and therefore, reliable fixed retention. The aim of the systematic review is to evaluate and summarize the available evidence on composite materials used for fixed orthodontic retention bonding, particularly in relation to their shear bond strength, wear resistance, microleakage, and adhesive stability within different bonding protocols. MATERIALS AND
methodsA comprehensive search was conducted across five databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and EBSCO Dentistry & Oral Sciences Source. The final search was performed on 10th July 2024. The keywords used were: “orthodontic” AND (“retention” OR “retainer” OR “fixed retainer”) AND (“composite” OR “adhesive”). Inclusion criteria were: in-vitro studies on debonding of fixed retainers, comparing multiple composites based on material type, applied forces, structural homogeneity, or bonding procedures. Exclusion criteria were: incomplete studies, case reports, editorials, short communications, and reviews. Studies published after 2000 were included with no language restrictions. The QUIN assessment tool was employed to evaluate the risk of bias. PROSPERO registration number is CRD42023487320. This research did not receive any external funding.
resultsThe search identified 927 records, with 504 duplicates removed, leaving 423 articles for analysis. Ultimately, 39 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Eleven studies exhibited low risk of bias, while the remaining presented medium risk of bias. It has been found that composite with higher filler content are more resistant to mechanical stress. Urethane dimethacrylate resin demonstrated superior adhesion. Etch and rinse bonding protocols yielded higher adhesion values and reduced composite microleakage, whereas self-adhesive composites necessitated more frequent check-ups. There is no direct relationship between the power of the polymerization lamp and composite conversion rate. To optimize fixed retention outcomes, composites should have a minimum islet width of 4–4.5 mm and a thickness of at least 1 mm.
conclusionsBonding protocols to enhance the longevity and effectiveness of orthodontic retainers should comprise etch and rinse protocol, and composite islets of at least 4–4.5 mm width and 1 mm thickness.
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.