Comparison of Perforated 3D Printed Versus Conventional Metal Fixed Bonded Retainer (NCT06851897) | Clinical Trial Compass
Active — Not RecruitingNot Applicable
Comparison of Perforated 3D Printed Versus Conventional Metal Fixed Bonded Retainer
Egypt64 participantsStarted 2025-02-14
Plain-language summary
Although different materials of mandibular fixed retainer were discussed in the literature, there is contradicting evidence regarding the bond failure of Titanium fixed metal retainer, whether immediate or after 12 months. Moreover, insufficient evidence is present regarding 3D metal printed fixed mandibular retainers.
Who can participate
Age range15 Years – 35 Years
SexALL
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Inclusion Criteria:
* Patients with properly finished orthodontic treatment.
* No sex predilection.
* The presence of 4 permanent mandibular incisors and 2 permanent mandibular canines.
* No active caries, restorations, fractures, or periodontal disease of previously mentioned teeth
* Patients with good oral hygiene.
Exclusion Criteria:
* Patients with no need of fixed mandibular retention.
* Enamel hypoplasia or hypocalcification of mandibular anterior teeth.
* Abnormal morphology of mandibular anterior teeth
* Periodontal disease that contraindicates fixed orthodontic retention.
* No or poor patient's compliance \& bad oral hygiene.
* Psychological problems.