Long-term periodontal status of patients with mandibular lingual fixed retention
* Private practice, Corfu
** Department of Periodontology, School of Dentistry, University of Athens
*** Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece
Address for correspondence Theodore Eliades, 57 Agnoston Hiroon, Nea Ionia 14231, Greece, E-mail: teliades{at}ath.forthnet.gr
 |
Abstract |
|---|
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the periodontal tissues of patients with mandibular fixed retention for long or short periods of time. A total of 64 individuals were selected for this study using the following inclusion criteria: long-term lingual fixed retention; identical type of lingual fixed retainer bonded with the same materials; no cavities, restorations, or fractures of the mandibular anterior teeth; absence of habits and occlusal interferences; and canine guidance bilaterally. The resultant sample comprised 32 patients (mean age 25 years) who had been in retention for a mean period of 9.65 years (range 9–11 years) and an equal number retained for a period between 3 and 6 months. Plaque, gingival, and calculus indices, probing pocket depth, marginal recession, and bone level at the mandibular six anterior teeth were recorded for both groups. Demographic, clinical, and radiographic data were investigated with conventional descriptive statistics. Comparisons of the different variables between the two participant groups (long- and short-term retention) were carried out using a Mann–Whitney test for indices (plaque, gingival, and calculus), and a Fisher's exact test (two sided) for the remaining variables.
No significant difference was found with respect to the plaque and gingival indices and bone level between the two groups. The long-term group presented higher calculus accumulation, greater marginal recession, and increased probing depth (P < 0.05). The results of this study raise the question of the appropriateness of lingual fixed retainers as a standard retention plan for all patients regardless of their attitude to dental hygiene. They also emphasize the importance of individual variability and cautious application of retention protocols after a thorough consideration of issues related to the anatomy of tissues and oral hygiene.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. P. E. Tacken, J. Cosyn, P. De Wilde, J. Aerts, E. Govaerts, and B. V. Vannet Glass fibre reinforced versus multistranded bonded orthodontic retainers: a 2 year prospective multi-centre study Eur J Orthod, October 16, 2009; (2009) cjp100v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|