Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT05915273

Relapse and Failure Rates Between CAD/CAM and Conventional Fixed Retainers

The aim of this study was to compare the differences in relapse and failure rates in patients treated with fixed retainers (FRs) using Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing technology, lab-based technique, and chairside method.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Relapse Disease Attributes Pathologic Processes Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms Recurrence

Age range

13 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Saint Louis University

St Louis, Missouri, 63104, United States

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • completion of comprehensive orthodontic treatment
  • class I molar and canine relationships
  • indication for a fixed retainer on the mandibular anterior teeth.
  • no extractions done as part of their treatment.
  • Treatment with preadjusted edgewise appliance.

Exclusion criteria

  • refusal to participate
  • refusal to have fixed retainers
  • poor oral hygiene
  • non-compliance

Treatment and study plan

Computer Aided Design/ Computer Aided Manufacturing Retainers

Other

Custom-bent fixed retainer wires from an in-office CAD/CAM system with FixR software and the BenderI machine (YOAT Corporation, Lynwood, WA). Dentaflex wires- round, 0.5mm in diameter, three-stranded Stainless Steel (Dentaurum GmbH & Co., Ispringen, Germany)- were used for the CAD/CAM group

Other names: CAD/CAM

Lab-based Retainers

Other

The lab group used the same type of wire as the CAD/CAM group but was manually bent by a lab technician

Chairside Retainers

Other

The chairside group used three-stranded Stainless Steel, 0.974mm x 0.402 mm, flexible Ortho-FlexTech wires (Reliance, Itasca, IL)

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in intercanine width (ICW)

    Time frame: 2 years

    ICW was measured on the Meshlab software using the 3D ruler measurement tool. Pre-treatment, post-treatment, and post-retention measures were recorded and any change in the ICW was considered relapse.

  2. Change in Little's Irregularity Index (LII)

    Time frame: 2 years

    ICW was measured on the Meshlab software using the 3D ruler measurement tool. Pre-treatment, post-treatment, and post-retention measures were recorded and any change in the LII was considered relapse.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Nourhan M.Aly

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Relapse and Failure Rates Between CAD/CAM and Conventional Fixed Retainers: A 2-year Follow-up of a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Important dates

Study start
2019
Primary completion
2022
Study completion
2022
First posted
Jun 22, 2023
Registry last updated
Jun 22, 2023

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.