[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-455702-105":59,"doc-detail-455702-en":134},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":127,"head_meta":129,"extra_data":131,"updated_unix":133},105,"en","effect-of-different-fixed-lingual-retainers-on-tooth-mobility-prospective-clinical-study","Effect of different fixed lingual retainers on tooth mobility: prospective clinical study","","Objective: This prospective clinical study compared the effects of three fixed lingual retainers on tooth mobility after orthodontic treatment at the 10-month follow-up. Methods: Seventy-two patients were assigned to Ortho FlexTech chain, Bond-A-Braid, or Penta-One groups, and 20 untreated individuals served as controls. Six mandibular anterior teeth were assessed with Periotest at T0 (baseline), T1 (immediately after retainer placement), and T2 (10 months). Results: Mobility decreased at T1 and T2 versus T0 (P\u003C0.05) with no differences among retainer types. Conclusions: Mobility fell immediately after retainer application but remained stable during follow-up in treatment groups. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06284499.",{"@graph":69,"@context":126},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/effect-of-different-fixed-lingual-retainers-on-tooth-mobility-prospective-clinical-study/455702/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/effect-of-different-fixed-lingual-retainers-on-tooth-mobility-prospective-clinical-study/455702.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Genevieve","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-07","2026-09-30",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":34},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118,122],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What was the objective of this prospective study?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"To compare how different fixed lingual retainers affect tooth mobility after orthodontic treatment at the 10-month follow-up.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How was tooth mobility measured, and at which time points?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Mobility of six mandibular anterior teeth was measured with a Periotest device at T0 (before retainer application), T1 (immediately after), and T2 (10 months after). Untreated controls were assessed only at T0.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"Did the different retainer types lead to different mobility outcomes?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"No. Mobility was significantly lower at T1 and T2 than at T0, but there were no differences between retainer groups at T1 or T2.",{"name":123,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":124},"What were the key findings during the follow-up period?",{"text":125,"@type":113},"Mobility decreased immediately after lingual retainer application, yet it did not change further during the 10-month follow-up in the treatment groups.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":128,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":130,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":132,"site_id":62},455702,1790814876,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":135},{"doc_id":132,"user_id":136,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":137,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":138,"file_id":139,"file_url":140,"file_type":141,"file_size":142,"view_count":34,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":29,"language":143,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":144,"faqs":145,"seo_title":146,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":147,"read_time":148},1374391974585,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","RESEARCH ARTICLE  \nEffect of different fixed lingual retainers on tooth mobility: prospective clinical study  \nEyüp Burak Küçüka , Özge Çelik Gülerb , Osman Fatih Arpağc  and Hatice Kübra Erena   \na Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Hatay Mustafa Kemal University, Hatay, Türkiye; bPrivate Practice, İdadent Dental Clinic,Çanakkale, Türkiye; c Department of Periodontology, Faculty of Dentistry, Hatay Mustafa Kemal University, Hatay, Türkiye  \nABSTRACT  \nObjective: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of different fixed lingual retainers (LRs) on tooth mobility after orthodontic treatment at the 10-month follow-up.  \nMethods: 72 patients were allocated to three different LR groups (Ortho FlexTech® chain, Bond-A-Braid®, Penta-One®) . Additionally, 20 non-treated people were included as a control group. The mobility of six mandibular anterior teeth was measured using a Periotest® device at each time points (before application of LR [T0], immediately after application of LR [T1] and 10 months after [T2] the application of the LR), and at only one time (T0) for the control group.  \nResults: The mobility value was significantly lower atT1 and T2 compared to that at T0 (P \u003C 0.05); yet, there were no differences at T1 and T2 in all LR groups (P > 0.05) . No significant differences in mobility between the T0-T1, T0-T2, and T1-T2 time points were observed across the LR groups (P > 0.05). The mobility of teeth 33 and 43 decreased over time across all study groups (P \u003C 0.05) .  \nConclusions: Mobility decreased immediately after LR application, but did not change during the 10-month follow-up in the treatment groups. The observed decrease in mobility of canines over time, in contrast to other teeth, suggests a relationship between root size and mobility.  \nTrial registration: The current clinical trial was recorded at [clinicaltrials.gov](clinicaltrials.gov, NCT06284499, 08/02/2024,)[, NCT06284499, 08/02/2024,](clinicaltrials.gov, NCT06284499, 08/02/2024,)[ ](clinicaltrials.gov, NCT06284499, 08/02/2024,)[retrospectively registered.](retrospectively registered.)  \nARTICLE HISTORY  \nReceived 2 July 2025 Accepted 30 August 2025  \nKEYWORDS  \nRetention and stability; tooth mobility; Periotest  \nIntroduction  \nAfter orthodontic treatment is completed, any adverse change in the position of the teeth associated with a malocclusion correction is referred as relapse. Several factors influence the incidence of relapse, includingthe elastic property of gingival fibers, lip/tongue pressure, and jaw growth during the retention period [1] . Changes in tooth position are also observed to occur due to normal age-related factors [2]. Thus, action is often taken during the subsequent retention period to ensure that the teeth remain in their new positions after orthodontic treatment [3] . Sufficient periodontal tissue must form around the root for successful tooth stability in a new position, and the soft tissues around the tooth must also adapt to the new tooth position.  \nA lingual retainer (LR) can be used during the retention period to maintain the ideal alignment of teeth after orthodontic treatment and prevent relapse [4]. However, LRs must both prevent relapse and allow physiological tooth movements [5]. To date, various types of wire have been used for retention, among which 6-strand coaxial wire [5, 6], rectangular 8-strand braided wire [6], flat braided chain wire [7], and computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) customized retainers [8] are so far the most used.  \nIn fact, low-level tooth mobility is well-known phenomenon during the retention phase. Different LRs are also well understood to provide different levels of stability; therefore, it is important to assess the extent to which LRs provide the best stability. Even though there have been several methods to measure this mobility, there is still a lack of standardization, which might lead to slight measurement uncertainty or intra clinical chang","cbCaireTTCWNiXC5","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaireTTCWNiXC5","pdf",746269,"English","# Abstract\n# Introduction\n# Materials and methods\n## Ethical approval and sample size calculation\n# Results\n# Conclusions\n# Trial registration\n# Article history","[{\"question\":\"What was the objective of this prospective study?\",\"answer\":\"To compare how different fixed lingual retainers affect tooth mobility after orthodontic treatment at the 10-month follow-up.\"},{\"question\":\"How was tooth mobility measured, and at which time points?\",\"answer\":\"Mobility of six mandibular anterior teeth was measured with a Periotest device at T0 (before retainer application), T1 (immediately after), and T2 (10 months after). Untreated controls were assessed only at T0.\"},{\"question\":\"Did the different retainer types lead to different mobility outcomes?\",\"answer\":\"No. Mobility was significantly lower at T1 and T2 than at T0, but there were no differences between retainer groups at T1 or T2.\"},{\"question\":\"What were the key findings during the follow-up period?\",\"answer\":\"Mobility decreased immediately after lingual retainer application, yet it did not change further during the 10-month follow-up in the treatment groups.\"}]","Effect of different fixed lingual retainers on tooth mobility: prospective clinical study | PDF",1790743913,15]