Retention of orthodontic brackets bonded with resin-modified GIC versus composite resin adhesives--a quantitative systematic review of clinical trials.

Steffen Mickenautsch, Veerasamy Yengopal, Avijit Banerjee

Division of Public Oral Health, Faculty of Health Science, University of the Witwatersrand, 7 York Rd., Parktown, Johannesburg, 2193, South Africa.

Journal Article: Clinical Oral Investigations (impact factor: 2.23). 02/2012; 16(1):1-14. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-011-0626-8

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review was to establish whether the clinical debonding (failure) rates of orthodontic brackets bonded either with resin-modified glass ionomer (RM-GIC) or with composite resin adhesive are the same. Five databases were searched for articles up to 18 November 2010. Inclusion criteria were titles/abstracts relevant to the review question and two or more arm clinical trial. Exclusion criteria were the following: no computable data recorded and subjects of both groups not followed up in the same way. From the accepted trials, datasets were analysed concerning clinical precision and internal validity. Eleven trials were accepted. From these, 15 dichotomous datasets were extracted. Relative risk with 95% confidence interval of nine datasets showed no statistically significant differences in outcome between the treatment and control group after 6 months-1.32 years. Five showed a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05), favouring resin composite bonding after 12 and 18 months. One favoured RM-GIC after 10 months. Meta-analysis found no difference in the failure rate between the two treatment groups after 12 months (RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.87-1.42; p = 0.40) and found in favour of composite resin adhesive after >14 months (RR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.60-3.17; p < 0.00001). All trials had poor internal validity due to selection and detection/performance bias risk. The current evidence suggests no difference between the types of materials after 12 months but favours composite resin adhesives after a >14-month period. However, its risk of selection and detection/performance bias are high, and all results need to be regarded with caution. Further high quality randomised control trials addressing this topic are needed. The clinical relevance of this study is that RM-GIC may have the same clinical debonding (failure) rate as composite resin adhesives after 1 year when used for bonding of orthodontic brackets.

Source: PubMed

Comments on this publication

ResearchGate members can add comments. Sign up now and post your comment!

Similar publications

Science & Research Jobs

Keywords

10 months
 
12 months
 
15 dichotomous datasets
 
18 months
 
arm clinical trial
 
clinical debonding
 
composite resin adhesive
 
computable data
 
control group
 
detection/performance bias risk
 
Exclusion criteria
 
favoured RM-GIC
 
favouring resin composite
 
Inclusion criteria
 
quality randomised control trials
 
Relative risk
 
resin-modified glass ionomer
 
statistically significant difference
 
systematic review
 
two treatment groups