Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 14, 2026
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
Failure Rates of Orthodontic Fixed Lingual Retainers bonded with Two Flowable Light-cured Adhesives: A Comparative
1Associate Professor and Consultant, Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia,
Introduction:
This comparative prospective randomized clinical trial examined the in vivo failure rates of fixed mandibular and maxillary lingual retainers bonded with two light-cured flowable composites over 6 months.
Materials And Methods:
Consecutive patients were divided into two groups on a 1:1 basis. Two hundred fixed lingual retainers were included, and their failures were followed for 6 months. One group (n = 50) received retainers bonded with a nano-hybrid composite based on nano-optimized technology (Tetric-N-Flow, Ivoclar Vivadent). Another group (n = 50) received retainers bonded with a low viscosity (LV) composite (Transbond Supreme LV, 3M Unitek).
Results:
There was no significant difference between the overall failure rates of mandibular retainers bonded with Transbond (8%) and those bonded with Tetric-N-Flow (18%). However, the odds ratio for failure using Tetric-N-flow was 2.52-fold greater than that of Transbond. The failure rate of maxillary retainers bonded with Transbond was higher (14%), but not significantly different, than that of maxillary retainers bonded with Tetric-N-flow (10%). There was no significant difference in the estimated mean survival times of the maxillary and mandibular retainers bonded with the two composites.
Conclusion:
Both types of composites tested in the current study can be used to bond fixed maxillary and mandibular lingual retainers, with low failure rates.
