Dental MalocclusionNCT04828096
Retention With Three Different Bonded Retainers a Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial With 5-year Follow-up
A study testing Orthodontic retention in people with Dental Malocclusion and Stability, run by Region Örebro County at 2 sites in 2 countries.
Trial summary
One of major challenges in orthodontics is to inhibit relapse and ensure stability of treatment outcomes. Retention is the phase of orthodontic treatment that attempts to keep teeth in the corrected position after correction with orthodontic braces. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 10 to 60 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Dental Malocclusion, Stability
- What is being tested?
- Orthodontic retention
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 324 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesin 2 countries
- Study dates
- 25 Mar 2021to 30 Sep 2030
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 10 to 60 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients requiring mandibular lingual fixed canine-to-canine retainer after undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances
- Sound enamel on the lingual surface
- Calculus-free lingual surface in the lower anterior segment
Who cannot join
- -
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 2 countries.
2 sites in 2 countries
Spain1 site
Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Department of Orthodontics
Barcelona, Catalonia
Sweden1 site
Postgraduate Dental Education Center
Örebro, Örebro County, SE-70111
About this study
Official title: Retention With Three Different Bonded Retainers: a Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial With 5-year Follow-up
One of major challenges in orthodontics is to inhibit relapse and ensure stability of treatment outcomes. Retention is the phase of orthodontic treatment that attempts to keep teeth in the corrected position after correction with orthodontic braces. Without retention there is a tendency for the teeth to return to their initial position (1). Retention is usually necessary to overcome the elastic recoil of the periodontal supporting fibers and to allow remodeling of the alveolar bone. The bonded orthodontic lingual retainer constructed from composite and orthodontic wires provides an esthetic and efficient system for maintained retention and has been shown to be an effective means of retaining aligned anterior teeth in the post treatment position in the long term. This has been in popular use as a method of retention since the late 1970s (2).
The traditional retainers, which are still in use, are multi-strand stainless steel retainers such as Penta-one® 0.0215 (Masel Orthodontics, Carlsbad, CA, USA). The main problem with multistrand stainless steel retainers is their high rate of failure. Clinical studies indicate that 5% to 37% of mandibular retainers fail during retention in some form, either bond failure or wire breakage (3-5). Reliance Orthodontic Products, Inc. (Itasca, IL, USA) recently introduced a bonded retainer system (Ortho-Flextech™ chain). This retainer's bonding is claimed to be quick and easy by reducing chairside time and eliminating laboratory costs (6). One other recently introduced retainer is Memotain™ (CA-Digital in Mettmann, Germany). Memotain is a CAD/CAM fabricated lingual retainer made of 0.014 X 0.014-inch rectangular nickel-titanium. The wire is highly flexible and custom cut to precisely adapt to the patient's lingual tooth anatomy. According to manufacturer, Memotain offers numerous perceived advantages to traditional multistranded lingual wires, including no need for wire measuring or bending, individually optimized placement, greater accuracy of fit, tighter interproximal adaptation, less tongue irritation, better durability, and resistance to microbial colonization (6). However, randomized clinical trials are necessary to determine whether these advantages are substantiated with scientific data.
Read more
A recent review by the Cochrane group concluded that to date there is insufficient evidence to single out any particular retention strategy as the preferred method: it was recommended that future studies should include true randomization, reporting of dropouts, adequate sample size calculation, and a minimum follow-up period of 3 months (8). Thus, the aims of this multicenter, randomised controlled trial are:
- To compare and evaluate the effectiveness and failure rate of Penta-one multistrand, Ortho-Flextech and Memotain retainers with each other
- To compare the possible complications between the three retainers over time
- To establish the cost-effectiveness of the three retainers
- To evaluate the effectiveness of sandblasting in the retention of the wires
Read the detailed description
Trial design This study is a 3-arm parallel-group, randomized controlled trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio.
Participants, eligibility criteria, and setting
Participants are to be recruited at the Postgraduate Dental Education Center, Department of Orthodontics, in Örebro, Henrikson Orthodontics, in Malmö and Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Department of Orthodontics, in Barcelona.
The following inclusion criteria is to be applied:
- Patients requiring mandibular lingual fixed canine-to-canine retainer after undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances
- Sound enamel on the lingual surface
- Calculus-free lingual surface in the lower anterior segment
Interventions
After informed consent is obtained, the patients are going to be randomized into three groups:
Group 1: Penta-One 0.0215 inch multistranded wire
Group 2: Ortho-FlexTech stainless steel chain
Group 3: Memotain wire
Procedures For all groups the time required for taking impressions and bonding of retainers is taken by a digital timer.
Patients allocated to Group 1:
After taking impressions and when the working models are cast in hard stone, all retainers (0.0215-inch multistranded Penta-one wire) are going to be contoured by dental technicians at each center.
All retainers in the study are to be bonded using the following sequence of construction.
- The fixed appliance is debonded, and the teeth are to be thoroughly cleaned and polished using oil-free pumice.
- After adequate moisture control using dental cotton rolls in the anterior segment, parotis dental rolls in the lateral segments, and saliva ejector, the lingual surfaces are to be sandblasted in half of the group (according to the randomization list)
- Lingual surfaces are etched with Ultra-Etch 35% phosphoric acid gel (Ultradent Products Inc, City, Utah), for 30 seconds and thoroughly rinsed and dried.
- A thin layer of primer Ortho Solo® (Ormco, Orange, CA, USA) applies.
- Retainer holds in place with dental floss and the fit is checked.
- Adequate amounts of composite Tetric Evo-Flow (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) is applied to the lingual surfaces of the six anterior teeth over the retainer, ensuring maximum coverage of the wire surface. The composite pads are light cured, both incisally and cervically, for 20 seconds per tooth.
Patients allocated to Group 2:
- The fixed appliance is debonded, and the teeth are to be thoroughly cleaned and polished using oil-free pumice.
- After adequate moisture control using dental cotton rolls in the anterior segment, parotis dental rolls in the lateral segments, and saliva ejector, the lingual surfaces are to be sandblasted in half of the group (according to the randomization list)
- Lingual surfaces are etched with Ultra-Etch 35% phosphoric acid gel (Ultradent Products Inc, City, Utah), for 30 seconds and thoroughly rinsed and dried.
- A thin layer of primer Ortho Solo® (Ormco, Orange, CA, USA) applies.
- Small amounts of composite Tetric Evo-Flow (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) were applied to the lingual surfaces of the six anterior teeth.
- Ortho-FlexTech chain is cut at chairside in desired length and hold in place with dental floss and the fit is checked.
- Small amounts of composite Tetric Evo-Flow (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) is applied to the lingual surfaces of the six anterior teeth over the retainer, ensuring maximum coverage of the wire surface. The composite pads are light cured, both incisally and cervically, for 20 seconds per tooth. Additional composite applies to cover the whole mesial-deistal surface of each tooth making sure not to cover the approximal surfaces. Then light cured for another 20 second per tooth.
Patients allocated to Group 3:
- After digital scanning of the anterior lower six teeth, the Memotain in ordered online.
- The fixed appliance is debonded, and the teeth are to be thoroughly cleaned and polished using oil-free pumice.
- After adequate moisture control using dental cotton rolls in the anterior segment, parotis dental rolls in the lateral segments, and saliva ejector, the lingual surfaces are to be sandblasted in half of the group (according to the randomization list)
- Lingual surfaces are etched with Ultra-Etch 35% phosphoric acid gel (Ultradent Products Inc, City, Utah), for 30 seconds and thoroughly rinsed and dried.
- A thin layer of primer Ortho Solo® (Ormco, Orange, CA, USA) applies.
- Memotain puts into placed using the positioning jig to ensure precise placement.
- Adequate amounts of composite Tetric Evo-Flow (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) are applied to the lingual surfaces of the canines initially and after removing the positioning jig on the remaining four anterior teeth, ensuring maximum coverage of the wire surface. The composite pads are light cured, both incisally and cervically, for 20 seconds per tooth.
Follow-ups During the visit to the clinics all groups are to take impressions with digital scanning of the upper and the lower dentition and intraoral photographs from the dentition at baseline (directly after debond) T0, 6 months after debond (T1), one year (T2) two years (T3) and five years (T4) after debond.
The digital study models will be assessed for identifying possible side effects and deviation of individual tooth positions. For this purpose Little's Irregularity Index (LII) (9) for tooth contact displacement will be used. Patients' records will be reviewed to assess the first debond or breakage of the retainers during the observation periods.
To determine the cost-effectiveness, the overall cost of the retainers including manufacturing, time for impressions and bonding will be calculated and compared.
Failure of a retainer can occur as a result of debonding, fracture, debonding and fracture, or retainer loss. Information on the site of failure e.g. single tooth bond failure, enamel/adhesive failure, or adhesive wire failure is to be recorded in the patients' records.
Only first failures are to be counted and failure location (which tooth) is to be noted. In addition, multiple failure sites in one retainer are going to be counted as one failure. Furthermore, failure is considered when there was debonding, fracture, debonding and fracture, or retainer loss.
Outcomes The primary outcome is failure rate/breakage of the retainers during the observation period.
Secondary outcome include, complications (such as BoP, calculus, caries, gingivitis), costs and the effect of micro-etching (sand blasting) on the failure rate.
Sample size estimation The calculated sample size for each group is based on a significance level of 0.05 and 90 per cent power to detect a clinically meaningful difference of 15 per cent failure rate between the groups. The sample size calculation indicated that 97 patients would be required in each group. To compensate for dropouts, we decided to include at least 108 patients in each group (an addition of 10 per cent per group) and a total of 324 patients.
- Conditions
- Dental Malocclusion, Stability
- Being tested
- Orthodontic retention
- Keywords
- Orthodontic retention, Stability, Long-term
- Medical subject headings
- Malocclusion
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Orthodontic retentionOther
The stability of the mandibular anterior teeth after two resp. 5 years of retention
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Penta-one retainer | Active comparator | Penta-one retainer is one wire that is been in use for many years. Penta-one retainer is to be bonded on the lower anterior 6 teeth (canine-to-canine)- Half of the retainers are going to be bonded with sandblasted enamel and half without. Receives: Other: Orthodontic retention |
| Ortho-FlexTech retainer | Experimental | Ortho-Flextech chain wire is relatively new in the market and needs to be evaluated. Ortho-Flextech retainer is to be bonded on the lower anterior 6 teeth (canine-to-canine)- Half of the retianers are going to be bonded with sandblasted enamel and half without. Receives: Other: Orthodontic retention |
| Memotain retainer | Experimental | Memotain wire is relatively new in the market. It requires digital scanning and the technique is said to be very exact. Memotain retainer is to be bonded on the lower anterior 6 teeth (canine-to-canine)- Half of the retianers are going to be bonded with sandblasted enamel and half without. Receives: Other: Orthodontic retention |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Failure rate
Failure rate/breakage of the retainers during the observation periods
Measured: 2-year follow-up
Failure rate
Failure rate/breakage of the retainers during the observation periods
Measured: 5-year follow-up
Secondary outcomes (6)
Complications
Incidence of complications (if any) such as retraction of gingival tissue
Measured: 2-year follow-up
Cost-effectiveness
Cost-effectiveness analysis
Measured: 2-year follow-up
Effect of micro-etching
Effect of sandblasting on bonding strength and failure rate is to be evaluated
Measured: 2-year follow-up
Complications
Incidence of complications (if any) such as retraction of gingival tissue
Measured: 5-year follow-up
Cost-effectiveness
Cost-effectiveness analysis
Measured: 5-year follow-up
Effect of micro-etching
Effect of sandblasting on bonding strength and failure rate is to be evaluated
Measured: 5 -year follow-up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted1 Apr 2021
- Study start25 Mar 2021
- Primary completion30 Sep 2030 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Sep 2030 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Dental MalocclusionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 324 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Region Örebro County
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Farhan Bazargani, Region Örebro County
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04828096
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2020-04104
- Status last verified
- Aug 2026
- First submitted
- 25 Mar 2021
- Last updated
- 13 Aug 2026
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: There is not a plan to make IPD available.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Aug 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Retention With Three Different Bonded Retainers: a Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial With 5-year Follow-up
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04828096
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2020-04104
- Conditions
- Dental Malocclusion, Stability
- Keywords
- Orthodontic retention, Stability, Long-term
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Active, not recruiting
- Enrolment
- 324 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Region Örebro CountyUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 25 Mar 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Sep 2030 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Sep 2030 (estimated)
- First posted
- 1 Apr 2021 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
One of major challenges in orthodontics is to inhibit relapse and ensure stability of treatment outcomes. Retention is the phase of orthodontic treatment that attempts to keep teeth in the corrected position after correction with orthodontic braces. Without retention there is a tendency for the teeth to return to their initial position (1). Retention is usually necessary to overcome the elastic recoil of the periodontal supporting fibers and to allow remodeling of the alveolar bone. The bonded orthodontic lingual retainer constructed from composite and orthodontic wires provides an esthetic and efficient system for maintained retention and has been shown to be an effective means of retaining aligned anterior teeth in the post treatment position in the long term. This has been in popular use as a method of retention since the late 1970s (2).
The traditional retainers, which are still in use, are multi-strand stainless steel retainers such as Penta-one® 0.0215 (Masel Orthodontics, Carlsbad, CA, USA). The main problem with multistrand stainless steel retainers is their high rate of failure. Clinical studies indicate that 5% to 37% of mandibular retainers fail during retention in some form, either bond failure or wire breakage (3-5). Reliance Orthodontic Products, Inc. (Itasca, IL, USA) recently introduced a bonded retainer system (Ortho-Flextech™ chain). This retainer's bonding is claimed to be quick and easy by reducing chairside time and eliminating laboratory costs (6). One other recently introduced retainer is Memotain™ (CA-Digital in Mettmann, Germany). Memotain is a CAD/CAM fabricated lingual retainer made of 0.014 X 0.014-inch rectangular nickel-titanium. The wire is highly flexible and custom cut to precisely adapt to the patient's lingual tooth anatomy. According to manufacturer, Memotain offers numerous perceived advantages to traditional multistranded lingual wires, including no need for wire measuring or bending, individually optimized placement, greater accuracy of fit, tighter interproximal adaptation, less tongue irritation, better durability, and resistance to microbial colonization (6). However, randomized clinical trials are necessary to determine whether these advantages are substantiated with scientific data.
A recent review by the Cochrane group concluded that to date there is insufficient evidence to single out any particular retention strategy as the preferred method: it was recommended that future studies should include true randomization, reporting of dropouts, adequate sample size calculation, and a minimum follow-up period of 3 months (8). Thus, the aims of this multicenter, randomised controlled trial are:
- To compare and evaluate the effectiveness and failure rate of Penta-one multistrand, Ortho-Flextech and Memotain retainers with each other
- To compare the possible complications between the three retainers over time
- To establish the cost-effectiveness of the three retainers
- To evaluate the effectiveness of sandblasting in the retention of the wires
Detailed description
Trial design This study is a 3-arm parallel-group, randomized controlled trial with a 1:1 allocation ratio.
Participants, eligibility criteria, and setting
Participants are to be recruited at the Postgraduate Dental Education Center, Department of Orthodontics, in Örebro, Henrikson Orthodontics, in Malmö and Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Department of Orthodontics, in Barcelona.
The following inclusion criteria is to be applied:
- Patients requiring mandibular lingual fixed canine-to-canine retainer after undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances
- Sound enamel on the lingual surface
- Calculus-free lingual surface in the lower anterior segment
Interventions
After informed consent is obtained, the patients are going to be randomized into three groups:
Group 1: Penta-One 0.0215 inch multistranded wire
Group 2: Ortho-FlexTech stainless steel chain
Group 3: Memotain wire
Procedures For all groups the time required for taking impressions and bonding of retainers is taken by a digital timer.
Patients allocated to Group 1:
After taking impressions and when the working models are cast in hard stone, all retainers (0.0215-inch multistranded Penta-one wire) are going to be contoured by dental technicians at each center.
All retainers in the study are to be bonded using the following sequence of construction.
- The fixed appliance is debonded, and the teeth are to be thoroughly cleaned and polished using oil-free pumice.
- After adequate moisture control using dental cotton rolls in the anterior segment, parotis dental rolls in the lateral segments, and saliva ejector, the lingual surfaces are to be sandblasted in half of the group (according to the randomization list)
- Lingual surfaces are etched with Ultra-Etch 35% phosphoric acid gel (Ultradent Products Inc, City, Utah), for 30 seconds and thoroughly rinsed and dried.
- A thin layer of primer Ortho Solo® (Ormco, Orange, CA, USA) applies.
- Retainer holds in place with dental floss and the fit is checked.
- Adequate amounts of composite Tetric Evo-Flow (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) is applied to the lingual surfaces of the six anterior teeth over the retainer, ensuring maximum coverage of the wire surface. The composite pads are light cured, both incisally and cervically, for 20 seconds per tooth.
Patients allocated to Group 2:
- The fixed appliance is debonded, and the teeth are to be thoroughly cleaned and polished using oil-free pumice.
- After adequate moisture control using dental cotton rolls in the anterior segment, parotis dental rolls in the lateral segments, and saliva ejector, the lingual surfaces are to be sandblasted in half of the group (according to the randomization list)
- Lingual surfaces are etched with Ultra-Etch 35% phosphoric acid gel (Ultradent Products Inc, City, Utah), for 30 seconds and thoroughly rinsed and dried.
- A thin layer of primer Ortho Solo® (Ormco, Orange, CA, USA) applies.
- Small amounts of composite Tetric Evo-Flow (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) were applied to the lingual surfaces of the six anterior teeth.
- Ortho-FlexTech chain is cut at chairside in desired length and hold in place with dental floss and the fit is checked.
- Small amounts of composite Tetric Evo-Flow (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) is applied to the lingual surfaces of the six anterior teeth over the retainer, ensuring maximum coverage of the wire surface. The composite pads are light cured, both incisally and cervically, for 20 seconds per tooth. Additional composite applies to cover the whole mesial-deistal surface of each tooth making sure not to cover the approximal surfaces. Then light cured for another 20 second per tooth.
Patients allocated to Group 3:
- After digital scanning of the anterior lower six teeth, the Memotain in ordered online.
- The fixed appliance is debonded, and the teeth are to be thoroughly cleaned and polished using oil-free pumice.
- After adequate moisture control using dental cotton rolls in the anterior segment, parotis dental rolls in the lateral segments, and saliva ejector, the lingual surfaces are to be sandblasted in half of the group (according to the randomization list)
- Lingual surfaces are etched with Ultra-Etch 35% phosphoric acid gel (Ultradent Products Inc, City, Utah), for 30 seconds and thoroughly rinsed and dried.
- A thin layer of primer Ortho Solo® (Ormco, Orange, CA, USA) applies.
- Memotain puts into placed using the positioning jig to ensure precise placement.
- Adequate amounts of composite Tetric Evo-Flow (Ivoclar Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein) are applied to the lingual surfaces of the canines initially and after removing the positioning jig on the remaining four anterior teeth, ensuring maximum coverage of the wire surface. The composite pads are light cured, both incisally and cervically, for 20 seconds per tooth.
Follow-ups During the visit to the clinics all groups are to take impressions with digital scanning of the upper and the lower dentition and intraoral photographs from the dentition at baseline (directly after debond) T0, 6 months after debond (T1), one year (T2) two years (T3) and five years (T4) after debond.
The digital study models will be assessed for identifying possible side effects and deviation of individual tooth positions. For this purpose Little's Irregularity Index (LII) (9) for tooth contact displacement will be used. Patients' records will be reviewed to assess the first debond or breakage of the retainers during the observation periods.
To determine the cost-effectiveness, the overall cost of the retainers including manufacturing, time for impressions and bonding will be calculated and compared.
Failure of a retainer can occur as a result of debonding, fracture, debonding and fracture, or retainer loss. Information on the site of failure e.g. single tooth bond failure, enamel/adhesive failure, or adhesive wire failure is to be recorded in the patients' records.
Only first failures are to be counted and failure location (which tooth) is to be noted. In addition, multiple failure sites in one retainer are going to be counted as one failure. Furthermore, failure is considered when there was debonding, fracture, debonding and fracture, or retainer loss.
Outcomes The primary outcome is failure rate/breakage of the retainers during the observation period.
Secondary outcome include, complications (such as BoP, calculus, caries, gingivitis), costs and the effect of micro-etching (sand blasting) on the failure rate.
Sample size estimation The calculated sample size for each group is based on a significance level of 0.05 and 90 per cent power to detect a clinically meaningful difference of 15 per cent failure rate between the groups. The sample size calculation indicated that 97 patients would be required in each group. To compensate for dropouts, we decided to include at least 108 patients in each group (an addition of 10 per cent per group) and a total of 324 patients.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Penta-one retainer | Active comparator | Other: Orthodontic retentionPenta-one retainer is one wire that is been in use for many years. Penta-one retainer is to be bonded on the lower anterior 6 teeth (canine-to-canine)- Half of the retainers are going to be bonded with sandblasted enamel and half without. |
| Ortho-FlexTech retainer | Experimental | Other: Orthodontic retentionOrtho-Flextech chain wire is relatively new in the market and needs to be evaluated. Ortho-Flextech retainer is to be bonded on the lower anterior 6 teeth (canine-to-canine)- Half of the retianers are going to be bonded with sandblasted enamel and half without. |
| Memotain retainer | Experimental | Other: Orthodontic retentionMemotain wire is relatively new in the market. It requires digital scanning and the technique is said to be very exact. Memotain retainer is to be bonded on the lower anterior 6 teeth (canine-to-canine)- Half of the retianers are going to be bonded with sandblasted enamel and half without. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 10 to 60 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Patients requiring mandibular lingual fixed canine-to-canine retainer after undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances
- Sound enamel on the lingual surface
- Calculus-free lingual surface in the lower anterior segment
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- -
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Orthodontic retentionThe stability of the mandibular anterior teeth after two resp. 5 years of retention | Other | Memotain retainer, Ortho-FlexTech retainer, Penta-one retainer |
Primary outcome
Failure rate
Time frame: 2-year follow-up
Failure rate/breakage of the retainers during the observation periods
Failure rate
Time frame: 5-year follow-up
Failure rate/breakage of the retainers during the observation periods
6 secondary outcomes
Complications
Time frame: 2-year follow-up
Cost-effectiveness
Time frame: 2-year follow-up
Effect of micro-etching
Time frame: 2-year follow-up
Complications
Time frame: 5-year follow-up
Cost-effectiveness
Time frame: 5-year follow-up
Effect of micro-etching
Time frame: 5 -year follow-up
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 13 Aug 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. There is not a plan to make IPD available.
Related trials for Dental Malocclusion
Not yet recruiting
Treatment of Mandibular Overjet in Children With Maxillary Retrognathism
Maxillary Retrognathism, Children
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Customized CBCT-Based Assessment of Transverse Discrepancies
Transverse Skeletal Discrepancy
Recruiting
Maxillary Arch Distalization With Infrazygomatic Crest Miniscrews for Class II Malocclusion
Class II Malocclusion
Enrolling by invitation
Evaluation of Corticotomy-Assisted Canine Retraction Rate
Malocclusion, Corticotomy
Not yet recruiting
Comparison of Orthodontic Molar Protraction With and Without Adjunctive Surgery
Malocclusion
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
2 sites in 2 countries: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Orthodontic retention in people with Dental Malocclusion and Stability, run by Region Örebro County at 2 sites in 2 countries.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: under way, not looking for participants, as of the sponsor's last update on 13 Aug 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in Spain, Sweden. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Failure rate (time frame: 2-year follow-up). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 13 Aug 2026.