Reproducibility and accuracy of machine bent 3- and 6-stranded twistflex lingual fixed retainers—An in-vitro-study

IF 3.2 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Katharina Klaus , Jan D. Pollmeier , Sabine Ruf
{"title":"Reproducibility and accuracy of machine bent 3- and 6-stranded twistflex lingual fixed retainers—An in-vitro-study","authors":"Katharina Klaus ,&nbsp;Jan D. Pollmeier ,&nbsp;Sabine Ruf","doi":"10.1016/j.ejwf.2025.05.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The present study aimed to evaluate the precision with which a retainer bending machine can produce the designed CAD/CAM retainer.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Canine-to-canine retainers were digitally designed and fabricated ten times each on 20 debonding casts (10 upper, 10 lower) using the Bender II (YOAT Corp., Lynnwood, WA) with either 3- or 6-stranded twistflex wire. A master retainer for each model was created from the CAD/CAM coordinates and saved as a standard tessellation language (STL) file. All bent retainers were subsequently digitized using a laboratory scanner and superimposed with the master retainer (best-fit). Deviations between the machine-bent and master retainers were measured in millimeters across transversal, sagittal, and vertical dimensions. Statistical analysis was performed using a mixed linear model with fixed factors (jaw, wire type, number of retainers) and the number of casts as a random factor.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>For the entire sample, mean deviations ± standard deviation between master and bent retainers were 0.22 mm ± 0.64 in the transverse, –0.01 mm ± 0.33 in the sagittal, and 0.48 mm ± 0.23 in the vertical dimension. Lower retainers were found to be significantly more precise than upper retainers across all dimensions (transverse: <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001; sagittal: <em>P</em> &lt; 0.05; vertical: <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001). Additionally, 3-stranded twistflex retainers demonstrated significantly greater accuracy compared to 6-stranded wires (transverse: <em>P</em> &lt; 0.05; sagittal: <em>P</em> &lt; 0.05; vertical: <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The deviations in accuracy between the CAD/CAM planned retainer design and the machine-bent retainers could be clinically relevant, particularly for upper retainers in the transverse and vertical dimensions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":43456,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists","volume":"14 5","pages":"Pages 295-302"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212443825000402","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"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

The present study aimed to evaluate the precision with which a retainer bending machine can produce the designed CAD/CAM retainer.

Methods

Canine-to-canine retainers were digitally designed and fabricated ten times each on 20 debonding casts (10 upper, 10 lower) using the Bender II (YOAT Corp., Lynnwood, WA) with either 3- or 6-stranded twistflex wire. A master retainer for each model was created from the CAD/CAM coordinates and saved as a standard tessellation language (STL) file. All bent retainers were subsequently digitized using a laboratory scanner and superimposed with the master retainer (best-fit). Deviations between the machine-bent and master retainers were measured in millimeters across transversal, sagittal, and vertical dimensions. Statistical analysis was performed using a mixed linear model with fixed factors (jaw, wire type, number of retainers) and the number of casts as a random factor.

Results

For the entire sample, mean deviations ± standard deviation between master and bent retainers were 0.22 mm ± 0.64 in the transverse, –0.01 mm ± 0.33 in the sagittal, and 0.48 mm ± 0.23 in the vertical dimension. Lower retainers were found to be significantly more precise than upper retainers across all dimensions (transverse: P < 0.001; sagittal: P < 0.05; vertical: P < 0.001). Additionally, 3-stranded twistflex retainers demonstrated significantly greater accuracy compared to 6-stranded wires (transverse: P < 0.05; sagittal: P < 0.05; vertical: P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The deviations in accuracy between the CAD/CAM planned retainer design and the machine-bent retainers could be clinically relevant, particularly for upper retainers in the transverse and vertical dimensions.
机器弯曲3股和6股扭转弯曲舌固定固定器的再现性和准确性-体外研究。
背景:本研究旨在评估保持器弯曲机生产设计的CAD/CAM保持器的精度。方法:使用Bender II (YOAT Corp., Lynnwood, WA)使用3股或6股扭扭钢丝,在20个脱粘铸件(10个上,10个下)上数字化设计和制造犬对犬固位器各10次。根据CAD/CAM坐标为每个模型创建一个主保持架,并保存为标准镶嵌语言(STL)文件。随后使用实验室扫描仪对所有弯曲固位器进行数字化处理,并与主固位器(最佳配合)叠加。机器弯曲和主保持器之间的偏差在横向,矢状和垂直尺寸上以毫米为单位测量。采用混合线性模型进行统计分析,其中固定因素(颚、金属丝类型、保持器数量)和铸件数量作为随机因素。结果:在整个样本中,主弯固位器与弯曲固位器的横向平均偏差±标准差为0.22 mm±0.64,矢状面为-0.01 mm±0.33,纵向为0.48 mm±0.23。发现在所有维度上,下固位器比上固位器更精确(横向:P < 0.001;矢状面:P < 0.05;纵向:P < 0.001)。此外,3股扭扭保持器的准确性明显高于6股钢丝(横向:P < 0.05;矢状面:P < 0.05;纵向:P < 0.001)。结论:CAD/CAM计划固位器设计与机器弯曲固位器之间的精度偏差可能与临床相关,特别是在横向和垂直尺寸上。
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
Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists
Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
4.80%
发文量
34
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信