Poly-Ether-Ether-Ketone versus dead-soft coaxial bonded retainers: a randomized clinical trial. Part 2: periodontal health and microbial biofilm assessment.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Esraa Salman Jasim, Ammar Salim Kadhum
{"title":"Poly-Ether-Ether-Ketone versus dead-soft coaxial bonded retainers: a randomized clinical trial. Part 2: periodontal health and microbial biofilm assessment.","authors":"Esraa Salman Jasim, Ammar Salim Kadhum","doi":"10.1093/ejo/cjae048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Retainers have the potential to detrimentally impact periodontal health and contribute to tooth decay.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate periodontal health and bacterial biofilm related to Poly-Ether-Ether-Ketone (PEEK) fixed retainers as compared to Dead-soft coaxial fixed retainer (DSC).</p><p><strong>Trial design: </strong>A two-arm parallel groups single-centre randomized clinical trial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The trial included patients whose orthodontic treatment was completed and required retainers. Participants were randomly assigned into two retainer groups: PEEK retainers, prepared by computer-aided design and manufacturing into 0.8 mm wire form, and DSC retainers. The objectives included assessing periodontal health through plaque accumulation index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), periodontal pocket depth (PPD), gingival index (GI), calculus index (CI), and alveolar bone height (ABH) assessment. Biofilm assessment involved bacteriological screening of aerobic, facultative anaerobic, mutans streptococci, and lactobacilli. The periodontal indices and microbiological screening as well as were assessed at the debonding stage (T0), 1-month (T1), 3-month (T3), and 6-month (T6) after the commencement of the trial, except for the ABH, which was recorded using periapical radiograph at T0 and T6.</p><p><strong>Blinding: </strong>Single blinding of participants in addition to the bacteriological specialist.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Initially, the trial enrolled 46 participants, aged between 12 and 28 years, and were randomly assigned to two groups, with 23 participants in each group. Subsequently, one participant withdrew from the trial, resulting in a total of 45 participants whose data were analysed. Assessment of the periodontal indices, excluding the CI (P = .480), revealed statistically but not clinically significant differences between groups after 6-month of retention (P = .016 of PI, P = .020 of BOP, P = .05 of PPD, and P = .01 of GI). There was slight plaque accumulation, normal PPD (approximately 1 mm), healthy to mild gingivitis with a GI of less than 1 and BOP was around 10%. Concerning the ABH, there was a noticeable reduction in its score after 6 months, particularly in the PEEK group, although the difference was not statistically significant (P = .102). Furthermore, the bacteriological viable count did not show any significant difference between the groups during the recall visits.</p><p><strong>Harms: </strong>There have been no reported negative consequences.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Blinding the assessor of periodontal indices was not feasible due to the nature of the intervention. The trial follow-up duration was limited.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both the PEEK and DSC retainers have comparable impacts on periodontal health and bacterial accumulation and composition during the retention period.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>NCT05557136.</p>","PeriodicalId":11989,"journal":{"name":"European journal of orthodontics","volume":"46 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjae048","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

Background: Retainers have the potential to detrimentally impact periodontal health and contribute to tooth decay.

Objectives: To investigate periodontal health and bacterial biofilm related to Poly-Ether-Ether-Ketone (PEEK) fixed retainers as compared to Dead-soft coaxial fixed retainer (DSC).

Trial design: A two-arm parallel groups single-centre randomized clinical trial.

Methods: The trial included patients whose orthodontic treatment was completed and required retainers. Participants were randomly assigned into two retainer groups: PEEK retainers, prepared by computer-aided design and manufacturing into 0.8 mm wire form, and DSC retainers. The objectives included assessing periodontal health through plaque accumulation index (PI), bleeding on probing (BOP), periodontal pocket depth (PPD), gingival index (GI), calculus index (CI), and alveolar bone height (ABH) assessment. Biofilm assessment involved bacteriological screening of aerobic, facultative anaerobic, mutans streptococci, and lactobacilli. The periodontal indices and microbiological screening as well as were assessed at the debonding stage (T0), 1-month (T1), 3-month (T3), and 6-month (T6) after the commencement of the trial, except for the ABH, which was recorded using periapical radiograph at T0 and T6.

Blinding: Single blinding of participants in addition to the bacteriological specialist.

Results: Initially, the trial enrolled 46 participants, aged between 12 and 28 years, and were randomly assigned to two groups, with 23 participants in each group. Subsequently, one participant withdrew from the trial, resulting in a total of 45 participants whose data were analysed. Assessment of the periodontal indices, excluding the CI (P = .480), revealed statistically but not clinically significant differences between groups after 6-month of retention (P = .016 of PI, P = .020 of BOP, P = .05 of PPD, and P = .01 of GI). There was slight plaque accumulation, normal PPD (approximately 1 mm), healthy to mild gingivitis with a GI of less than 1 and BOP was around 10%. Concerning the ABH, there was a noticeable reduction in its score after 6 months, particularly in the PEEK group, although the difference was not statistically significant (P = .102). Furthermore, the bacteriological viable count did not show any significant difference between the groups during the recall visits.

Harms: There have been no reported negative consequences.

Limitations: Blinding the assessor of periodontal indices was not feasible due to the nature of the intervention. The trial follow-up duration was limited.

Conclusions: Both the PEEK and DSC retainers have comparable impacts on periodontal health and bacterial accumulation and composition during the retention period.

Trial registration: NCT05557136.

聚醚醚酮与死软同轴粘结保持器:随机临床试验。第二部分:牙周健康和微生物生物膜评估。
背景:保持器有可能对牙周健康产生不利影响并导致蛀牙:研究聚醚醚酮(PEEK)固定保持器与死软同轴固定保持器(DSC)的牙周健康和细菌生物膜:试验设计:双臂平行组单中心随机临床试验:试验包括已完成正畸治疗并需要保持器的患者。参与者被随机分配到两个保持器组:PEEK保持器通过计算机辅助设计和制造,制成0.8毫米的线状,DSC保持器则通过计算机辅助设计和制造,制成0.8毫米的线状。目标包括通过牙菌斑累积指数(PI)、探诊出血量(BOP)、牙周袋深度(PPD)、牙龈指数(GI)、牙结石指数(CI)和牙槽骨高度(ABH)评估牙周健康状况。生物膜评估包括需氧菌、兼性厌氧菌、变异链球菌和乳酸杆菌的细菌学筛查。牙周指数、微生物筛查和评估分别在试验开始后的脱粘阶段(T0)、1 个月(T1)、3 个月(T3)和 6 个月(T6)进行,但 ABH 除外,在 T0 和 T6 使用根尖周炎 X 光片进行记录:盲法:除细菌学专家外,还对参与者进行单盲:试验最初招募了 46 名参与者,年龄在 12 至 28 岁之间,随机分配到两组,每组 23 人。随后,一名参与者退出了试验,因此共有 45 名参与者的数据得到了分析。对牙周指数的评估(不包括 CI(P = 0.480))显示,在保留 6 个月后,各组之间存在统计学差异,但无临床意义(PI 的 P = 0.016,BOP 的 P = 0.020,PPD 的 P = 0.05,GI 的 P = 0.01)。牙菌斑堆积轻微,PPD 正常(约 1 毫米),牙龈炎健康至轻微,GI 小于 1,BOP 约为 10%。关于 ABH,6 个月后其评分明显下降,尤其是在 PEEK 组,但差异无统计学意义(P = .102)。此外,在回访期间,细菌存活计数在各组之间也没有显示出明显的差异:局限性:局限性:由于干预的性质,对牙周指数的评估者进行盲法测试是不可行的。试验随访时间有限:结论:PEEK和DSC保持器在保持期间对牙周健康、细菌积累和组成的影响相当:试验注册:NCT05557136。
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 求助全文
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.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信