Retention und digitale Entwicklung

Zusammenfassung

Die kieferorthopädische Therapie gliedert sich in einen aktiv und einen passiv begleiteten Abschnitt. Hierdurch könnte man annehmen, dass letztere Phase seitens des Behandlers kaum zu beeinflussen ist.

Das Gegenteil ist jedoch der Fall, denn schon in der Behandlungsplanung und auch in der Durchführung können Maßnahmen getroffen werden, um die sich anschließende Retentionsphase positiv zu gestalten. So gilt es z. B. bestimmte Risikofaktoren prätherapeutisch zu erkennen, um infolgedessen stabilitätsfördernde Schritte einzuleiten.

Ohne die erfolgreiche Retention eines kieferorthopädischen Behandlungsergebnisses werden alle zuvor getroffenen aktiven Maßnahmen zunichte gemacht. Aus diesem Grund stellt die Retention einen wichtigen Baustein in der umfänglichen Versorgung der Patienten dar.

Dank neuer digitaler Technologien werden dem Kieferorthopäden innovative Werkzeuge bereitgestellt, die zur Verbesserung einer individualisierten Therapie beitragen können.

Abstract

Orthodontic therapy can be divided in an active and a passive section. This could lead to the assumption, that the orthodontist is not able to take influence on the passive treatment phase.

In contrast to that supposition, many actions can be made during planning and procedure of treatment to set the best preconditions for a favorable retention stage. For instance, it is necessary to identify certain risk factors before starting treatment. Consequently, the correct actions can be performed to end in a solid result.

Without successful retention, every step during active treatment will be useless. On this account orthodontic retention becomes a key part in the comprehensive therapy of the patients.

Thanks to digital development, innovative tools can be used to enhance individualized orthodontic treatment.

Schlüsselwörter

Retention - digitale Kieferorthopädie - individualisierte Behandlung

Key words

retention - digital orthodontics - individualized treatment

Publication History

Article published online:
11 September 2020

• Literatur

• 1 Eslambolchi S, Woodside DG, Rossouw PE. A descriptive study of mandibular incisor alignment in untreated subjects. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.038
• 2 Blake M, Bibby K. Retention and stability: a review of the literature. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998; 114: 299-306
• 3 Sinclair PM, Little RM. Maturation of untreated normal occlusions. Am J Orthod 1983; 83: 114-123
• 4 Thilander B. Dentoalveolar development in subjects with normal occlusion. A longitudinal study between the ages of 5 and 31 years. Eur J Orthod 2009;
• 5 Rossouw PE. Terminology: semantics of postorthodontic treatment changes in the dentition. Semin Orthod 1999; 5: 138-141
• 6 Ihlow D, Rudzki I. Hrsg Kieferorthopädische Retention. Thieme; 2017
• 7 Graber LW, Vanarsdall RL, Vig KWL. et al Orthodontics: Current principles and techniques. 6. Aufl . Elsevier; 2016
• 8 Little RM. Stability and relapse of dental arch alignment. Br J Orthod 1990; 17: 235-241
• 9 Little RM. Stability and relapse of mandibular anterior alignment: University of Washington studies. Semin Orthod 1999; 5: 191-204
• 10 Rossini G, Parrini S, Castroflorio T. et al. Diagnostic accuracy and measurement sensitivity of digital models for orthodontic purposes: A systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016; 149: 161-170
• 11 Wolf M, Schulte U, Küpper K. et al. Post-treatment changes in permanent retention. J Orofac Orthop 2016; 77: 446-453
• 12 Reitan K. Principles of retention and avoidance of posttreatment relapse. Am J Orthod 1969; 55: 776-790
• 13 Ormiston JP, Huang GJ, Little RM. et al. Retrospective analysis of long-term stable and unstable orthodontic treatment outcomes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005; 128: 568-574; quiz 669
• 14 Burke SP, Silveira AM, Goldsmith LJ. et al. A meta-analysis of mandibular intercanine width in treatment and postretention. Angle Orthod 1998; 68: 53-60
• 15 Herberger RJ. Stability of mandibular intercuspid width after long periods of retention. Angle Orthod 1981; 51: 78-83
• 16 Huck L, Kahl-Nieke B, Schwarze CW. et al. Postretention changes in canine position. Results of a long-term follow-up. J Orofac Orthop 2000; 61: 199-206
• 17 STRANG RH. Factors of influence in producing a stable result in the treatment of malocclusion. Am J Orthod Oral Surg 1946; 32: 313-332
• 18 Lossdörfer S, Schwestka-Polly R, Wiechmann D. Control of lower incisor inclination with a completely customized lingual appliance for dentoalveolar compensation of class III malocclusion. J Orofac Orthop 2013; 74: 381-396
• 19 Grauer D, Proffit WR. Accuracy in tooth positioning with a fully customized lingual orthodontic appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011; 140: 433-443
• 20 Wiechmann D, Schwestka-Polly R, Pancherz H. et al. Control of mandibular incisors with the combined Herbst and completely customized lingual appliance – a pilot study. Head Face Med 2010; 6: 3
• 21 de Freitas KM, Janson G, de Freitas MR. et al. Influence of the quality of the finished occlusion on postretention occlusal relapse. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007; 132: 428.e9-14
• 22 Kurz M, Attin T, Mehl A. Influence of material surface on the scanning error of a powderfree 3D measuring system. Clin Oral Investig 2015; 19: 2035-2043
• 23 Koo BC, Chung CH, Vanarsdall RL. Comparison of the accuracy of bracket placement between direct and indirect bonding techniques. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999; 116: 346-351
• 24 Reitan K. Principles of retention and avoidance of posttreatment relapse. Am J Orthod 1969; 55: 776-790
• 25 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; 19: 501-509
• 26 Atack N, Harradine N, Sandy JR. et al. Which way forward? Fixed or removable lower retainers. Angle Orthod 2007; 77: 954-959
• 27 Schwarze J, Bourauel C, Drescher D. The mobility of the anterior teeth after the direct bonding of lingual retainers. A comparison of in-vitro and in-vivo measurements. Fortschr Kieferorthop 1995; 56: 25-33
• 28 Watted N, Wieber M, Teuscher T. et al. Comparison of incisor mobility after insertion of canine-to-canine lingual retainers bonded to two or to six teeth. A clinical study. J Orofac Orthop 2001; 62: 387-396
• 29 Katsaros C, Livas C, Renkema AM. Unexpected complications of bonded mandibular lingual retainers. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007; 132: 838-841
• 30 ZWP-Online. „Der X-Effekt als unerwartete Komplikation nach Retainerklebung“ (März 2018) Im Internet: https://www.zwp-online.info/fachgebiete/kieferorthopaedie/therapie/der-x-effekt-als-unerwartete-komplikation-nach-retainerklebung Stand: 09.05.2020
• 31 Kravitz ND, Grauer D, Schumacher P. et al. Memotain: A CAD/CAM nickel-titanium lingual retainer. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2017; 151: 812-815
• 32 Knaup I, Wagner Y, Wego J. et al. Potential impact of lingual retainers on oral health: comparison between conventional twistflex retainers and CAD/CAM fabricated nitinol retainers : A clinical in vitro and in vivo investigation. J Orofac Orthop 2019; 80: 88-96 Epub 2019 Feb 18