Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Summary Review
  • Published:

Fixed orthodontic retainers and periodontal health

Evidence-Based Dentistry volume 21, pages 146–149 (2020)Cite this article

Abstract

Data sources The following electronic databases were searched from 1946 to 31 August 2019: Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, the National Research Register and Pro-Quest Dissertation Abstracts and Thesis database.

Study selection The following study designs were eligible: randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials, cohort studies of prospective and retrospective design, and cross-sectional studies that reported periodontal measurements on patients who received fixed retention after orthodontic therapy. Studies irrespective of their language were selected by two reviewers independently.

Data extraction and synthesis Data extraction from the selected studies and risk of bias assessments were performed by two reviewers independently. Specific risk of bias tools were used according to the pertinent research designs of the included studies. Criteria for conducting a meta-analysis were not met and a qualitative synthesis was conducted.

Results Twenty-nine studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria; that is, 11 RCTs, four prospective cohort studies, one retrospective cohort study and 13 cross-sectional studies. The quality of the evidence was low for most of the studies included in this review. Contrary to the general consensus, two RCTs, one prospective cohort study and two cross-sectional studies identified poorer periodontal health in patients with fixed orthodontic retainers.

Conclusions The authors of this systematic review concluded that fixed orthodontic retainers in the majority of the 29 included studies seemed to be a method of retention that is rather compatible with periodontal health, or at least not related to severe detrimental consequences for the periodontium. No recommendations on the best type of fixed retainer to use could be given. High-quality evidence from long-term studies is necessary to provide definitive conclusions on the relationship between fixed retainers and periodontal health.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arn M L, Dritsas K, Pandis N, Kloukos D. The effects of fixed orthodontic retainers on periodontal health: A systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2020; 157: 156-164.

  2. Liberati A, Altman D G, Tetzlaff J et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2009; 339: DOI: 10.1136/bmj.b2700.

  3. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009; 6: DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.

  4. Stevens A, Garritty C, Hersi M, Moher D. Developing PRISMA-RR, a reporting guideline for rapid reviews of primary studies (Protocol). Available at http://www.equator-network.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/PRISMA-RR-protocol.pdf (accessed March 2020).

  5. Shea B J, Reeves B C, Wells G et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ 2017; 358: DOI:10.1136/bmj.j4008.

  6. University of Bristol. Risk of bias in systematic reviews (ROBIS). ROBIS tool and the ROBIS guidance document. Available at http://www.bristol.ac.uk/social-community-medicine/projects/robis/ (accessed February 2020).

  7. Whiting P, Savović J, Higgins J P et al. ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol 2016; 69: 225-234.

  8. PROSPERO: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. University of York UK. Available at http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ (accessed February 2020).

  9. Kirkham J J, Altman D G, Williamson P R. Bias due to changes in specified outcomes during the systematic review process. PLoS One 2010; 5: DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009810.

  10. Page M J, McKenzie J E, Kirkham J et al. Bias due to selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses in systematic reviews of randomised trials of healthcare interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009810.

  11. Stewart L, Moher D, Shekelle P. Why prospective registration of systematic reviews makes sense. Syst Rev 2012; 1: 7.

  12. Cooke A, Smith D, Booth A. Beyond PICO: the SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. Qual Health Res 2012; 22: 1435-1443.

  13. Golder S, Loke Y K, Wright K, Norman G. Reporting of adverse events in published and unpublished studies of health care interventions: a systematic review. PLoS Med 2016; 13: DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002127.

  14. Schroll J B, Penninga E I, Gøtzsche P C. Assessment of Adverse Events in Protocols, Clinical Study Reports, and Published Papers of Trials of Orlistat: A Document Analysis. PLoS Med 2016; 13: DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002101.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthodontics, Academisch Centrum Tandheelkunde Amsterdam (ACTA), University of Amsterdam, Gustav Mahlerlaan 3004, 1081 LA Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Pauline A. J. Steegmans

  2. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Studio di Ortodonzia, Via Matteo Bandello 15, 20123 Milan, Italy

    Reint A. Meursinge Reynders

Authors
  1. Pauline A. J. Steegmans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Reint A. Meursinge Reynders
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Reint A. Meursinge Reynders.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Steegmans, P., Meursinge Reynders, R. Fixed orthodontic retainers and periodontal health. Evid Based Dent 21, 146–149 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-020-0144-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41432-020-0144-0

Search

Advanced search

Quick links