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

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

Status

Completed

Phases

Study type

Interventional

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT05915273

Enrollment

Registered

2023-06-22

Start date

2019-09-01

Completion date

2022-09-30

Last updated

2023-06-22

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Relapse

Brief summary

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.

Interventions

OTHERLab-based Retainers

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

OTHERComputer Aided Design/ Computer Aided Manufacturing Retainers

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

OTHERChairside Retainers

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

Study design

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Intervention model

PARALLEL

Primary purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

DOUBLE (Subject, Investigator)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

ALL

Age

13 Years to No maximum

Healthy volunteers

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

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame	Description
Change in intercanine width (ICW)	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.
Change in Little's Irregularity Index (LII)	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.

Countries

United States

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 7, 2026