The prevalence of the failure of fixed orthodontic bonded retainers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE European journal of orthodontics Pub Date : 2023-11-30 DOI:10.1093/ejo/cjad047
Su Thae Aye, Shiyao Liu, Emer Byrne, Ahmed El-Angbawi
{"title":"The prevalence of the failure of fixed orthodontic bonded retainers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Su Thae Aye, Shiyao Liu, Emer Byrne, Ahmed El-Angbawi","doi":"10.1093/ejo/cjad047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To systematically assess the scientific literature for the prevalence of failure rate of fixed orthodontic bonded retainer (FOBR).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective non-RCTs involving participants who had FOBR fitted were included. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of science, MEDLINE, and EMBASE via OVID were searched from inception to January 2023. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 and Newcastle-Ottawa tools. The main outcome was the failure rate of FOBRs. The secondary outcome was to identify factors that can influence the failure of FOBR. Meta-analyses and sensitivity analyses were undertaken using Revman, version5.4. A random-effects model was used. Quality assessment using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-four studies (25 RCTs and 9 prospective clinical studies) (3484 participants) were included in this review. The overall failure rate of bonded retainers, after excluding high-risk studies, was 35.22% (95% confidence interval [CI] 27.46-42.98). The failure rate is increased with the duration of follow up; with short-term follow-up rate 24.18% (95% CI 20.16-28.21), medium-term follow up 40.09% (95% CI 30.92-49.26), and long-term follow up 53.85% (95% CI 40.31-67.39). There is a low level of evidence to suggest there is no statistically significant difference in the failure rate of fixed retainers using direct versus indirect bonding methods, using liquid resin versus without liquid resin, and fibre-reinforced composite retainers compared to multi-stranded stainless steel retainers.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There is low-quality evidence to suggest that the failure rate of FOBR is relatively high. There is a need for high-quality, well-reported clinical studies to assess factors that can influence the failure rate of FOBR.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>CRD42021190910.</p>","PeriodicalId":11989,"journal":{"name":"European journal of orthodontics","volume":" ","pages":"645-661"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10687514/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjad047","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To systematically assess the scientific literature for the prevalence of failure rate of fixed orthodontic bonded retainer (FOBR).

Method: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective non-RCTs involving participants who had FOBR fitted were included. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of science, MEDLINE, and EMBASE via OVID were searched from inception to January 2023. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 and Newcastle-Ottawa tools. The main outcome was the failure rate of FOBRs. The secondary outcome was to identify factors that can influence the failure of FOBR. Meta-analyses and sensitivity analyses were undertaken using Revman, version5.4. A random-effects model was used. Quality assessment using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.

Results: Thirty-four studies (25 RCTs and 9 prospective clinical studies) (3484 participants) were included in this review. The overall failure rate of bonded retainers, after excluding high-risk studies, was 35.22% (95% confidence interval [CI] 27.46-42.98). The failure rate is increased with the duration of follow up; with short-term follow-up rate 24.18% (95% CI 20.16-28.21), medium-term follow up 40.09% (95% CI 30.92-49.26), and long-term follow up 53.85% (95% CI 40.31-67.39). There is a low level of evidence to suggest there is no statistically significant difference in the failure rate of fixed retainers using direct versus indirect bonding methods, using liquid resin versus without liquid resin, and fibre-reinforced composite retainers compared to multi-stranded stainless steel retainers.

Discussion: There is low-quality evidence to suggest that the failure rate of FOBR is relatively high. There is a need for high-quality, well-reported clinical studies to assess factors that can influence the failure rate of FOBR.

Registration: CRD42021190910.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
固定正畸粘结固位器失败的发生率:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。
目的:系统地评估固定正畸粘结固位器(FOBR)失败率的科学文献。方法:纳入随机临床试验(RCT)和前瞻性非随机对照试验,参与者采用FOBR。从开始到2023年1月,通过OVID搜索Cochrane对照试验中央登记册、科学网、MEDLINE和EMBASE。使用Cochrane RoB2和Newcastle Ottawa工具评估偏倚风险。主要结果是FOBR的失败率。次要结果是确定可能影响FOBR失败的因素。使用Revman 5.4版进行荟萃分析和敏感性分析。采用随机效应模型。使用建议分级评估、开发和评估的质量评估。结果:34项研究(25项随机对照试验和9项前瞻性临床研究)(3484名参与者)纳入本综述。排除高危研究后,粘结型固位器的总体失败率为35.22%(95%置信区间[CI]27.46-42.98)。失败率随着随访时间的延长而增加;短期随访率为24.18%(95%CI 20.16-28.21),中期随访率为40.09%(95%CI 30.92-49.26),长期随访率为53.85%(95%CI 40.31-67.39)。有少量证据表明,使用直接与间接粘合方法、使用液体树脂与不使用液体树脂的固定固位器的失败率没有统计学上的显著差异,以及与多股不锈钢保持器相比的纤维增强复合材料保持器。讨论:有低质量的证据表明FOBR的失败率相对较高。需要高质量、报道充分的临床研究来评估可能影响FOBR失败率的因素。注册号:CRD42021190910。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European journal of orthodontics
European journal of orthodontics 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
71
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Orthodontics publishes papers of excellence on all aspects of orthodontics including craniofacial development and growth. The emphasis of the journal is on full research papers. Succinct and carefully prepared papers are favoured in terms of impact as well as readability.
期刊最新文献
Clinical risk factors caused by third molar levelling following extraction of a mandibular second molar. Does incisor inclination change during orthodontic treatment affect gingival thickness and the width of keratinized gingiva? A prospective controlled study. Roles of B-cell lymphoma 6 in orthodontic tooth movement of rat molars. Influence of genetic and environmental factors on transverse growth. The effect of micro-osteoperforation (MOP) in molar distalization treatments: an exploratory systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1