head JofIMAB
Journal of IMAB - Annual Proceeding (Scientific Papers)
Publisher: Peytchinski Publishing Ltd.
ISSN: 1312-773X (Online)
Issue: 2023, vol. 29, issue1
Subject Area: Dental Medicine
DOI: 10.5272/jimab.2023291.4820
Published online: 13 February 2023

Original article
J of IMAB. 2023 Jan-Mar;29(1):4820-4825
Vladimir PetrunovORCID logo Corresponding Autoremail,
Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University, Sofia, Bulgaria.

Following the integration of fixed retainers into the clinical practice, an increasing number of orthodontists prefer this retention method. Further to the proven advantages of those retainers, however, there are some deficiencies, which, if not taken into consideration, might compromise the good treatment result. CAD-CAM methods employ a different approach in design, materials and method of fabrication, and clinical procedures with respect to fixation. This allows for the avoidance of a large part of the deficiencies of the fixed retainers that are made manually.
Aim: Our aim is to demonstrate the clinical effectiveness of titanium CAD/CAM fixed retainers.
Materials and methods: Swing (DOF) Laboratory scanner was used to scan the models. Retainers were designed through Exocad Matera (Exocad GmbH) software. Retainers were fabricated of titanium Ti G5 (SILADENT Dr Böhme & Schöps GmbH) discs, machined with CORiTEC 650i (Imes-icore GmbH) 5-axis dental milling machine.
Results: The outcome is a retainer, which is excellently fitting to the dental surface, absolutely passive, resistant to plastic deformation, fracture-proof and with an extremely easy clinical fixing procedure.
Conclusion: CAD/CAM methods employ an innovative approach, providing a different manufacturing technology and the use of various materials for the purposes of fixed retention. These methods eliminate a significant part of the deficiencies of the conventional manually bent retainers.

Keywords: CAD/CAM, titanium G5, fixed retainer, relapse,

pdf - Download FULL TEXT /PDF 966 KB/
Please cite this article as: Petrunov V. Clinical Effectiveness of Titanium CAD/CAM Retainers from a Biochemical Point of View. J of IMAB. 2023 Jan-Mar;29(1):4820-4825.
DOI: 10.5272/jimab.2022281.4820

Corresponding AutorCorrespondence to: Vladimir Petrunov, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University – Sofia; 1, Georgi Sofiiski Blvd., Sofia, Bulgaria; E-mail: dr.petrunov@mail.bg

1. Little RM, Riedel RA, Artun J. An evaluation of changes in mandibular anterior alignment from 10 to 20 years postretention. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988 May;93(5):423-8. [PubMed]
2. Reitan K. Clinical and histologic observations on tooth movement during and after orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod. 1967 Oct;53(10):721-45. [PubMed]
3. Artun J, Spadafora AT, Shapiro PA. A 3-year follow-up study of various types of orthodontic canine-to-canine retainers. Eur J Orthod. 1997 Oct;19(5):501-9. [PubMed]
4. Zachrisson BU. Clinical experience with direct-bonded orthodontic retainers. Am J Orthod. 1977 Apr;71(4):440-8. [PubMed]
5. Ferreira LA, Sapata DM, Provenzano MGA, Hayacibara RM, Ramos AL. Periodontal parameters of two types of 3 x 3 orthodontic retainer: a longitudinal study. Dental Press J Orthod. 2019 Aug 1;24(3):64-70. [PubMed]
6. Meade MJ, Millett DT. Orthodontic Bonded Retainers: a Narrative Review. Dent Update. 2020 May;47(5):421-32. [Crossref]
7. van Noort R. The future of dental devices is digital. Dent Mater. 2012 Jan;28(1):3-12. [PubMed]
8. Samra APB, Morais E, Mazur RF, Vieira SR, Rached RN. CAD/CAM in dentistry – a critical review. Rev Odonto Cienc. 2016; 31(3):140-4. [Crossref]
9. Abduo J, Lyons K, Bennamoun M. Trends in computer-aided manufacturing in prosthodontics: a review of the available streams. Int J Dent. 2014;2014:783948. [PubMed]
10. Webb PA. A review of rapid prototyping (RP) techniques in the medical and biomedical sector. J Med Eng Technol. 2000 Jul-Aug;24(4):149-53. [PubMed]
11. Gogushev K, Abadjiev M. Conventional vs digital impression technique for manufacturing of three-unit zirconia bridges: clinical time efficiency. J of IMAB. 2021 Apr-Jun;27(2):3765-3771. [Crossref]
12. Dahl EH, Zachrisson BU. Long-term experience with direct-bonded lingual retainers. J Clin Orthod. 1991 Oct;25(10):619-30. [PubMed]
13. Kučera J, Littlewood SJ, Marek I. Fixed retention: pitfalls and complications. Br Dent J. 2021 Jun;230(11):703-8. [PubMed]
14. Kartal Y, Kaya B. Fixed Orthodontic Retainers: A Review. Turk J Orthod. 2019 Jun;32(2):110-114. [PubMed]
15. Daly K, Czochrowska EM, Sandler J. Three methods of fixed mandibular retainer fabrication and delivery. Forum Ortod. 2017 Dec;13(4):291-300. [Internet]
16. Sifakakis I, Pandis N, Eliades T, Makou M, Katsaros C, Bourauel C. In-vitro assessment of the forces generated by lingual fixed retainers. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 Jan;139(1):44-8. [PubMed]
17. Seide M, Kruse T, Graf I, Bourauel C, Lapatki BG, Jäger R, et al. Inadvertent side effects of fixed lingual retainers: An in vitro study. J Orofac Orthop. 2022 Nov 11;1-10. [Crossref]
18. McInnes N, Carty O. Gingival recession with fixed retainer. Br Dent J. 2021 Jul;231(1):4. [PubMed]
19. Zhekov Y, Firkova E,  Kissov H, Aleksandrov S. CAD/CAM fiber-reinforced composite splint for immobilization of periodontally compromised teet. J of IMAB. 2022 Apr-Jun;28(2):4335-4337. [Crossref].

Received: 02 November 2022
Published online: 13 February 2023

back to Online Journal