English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The objectives of this study were to assess gingival recessions (GR) and periodontal status in patients previously treated with non-extraction orthodontic treatment and retention at a follow-up of a minimum of two years after the end of treatment. Data from patients aged between 16 and 35 years with a previous non-extraction orthodontic treatment and at least 2 years of retention and full records before and after treatment were collected. The casts were digitalized using the 3Shape TRIOS® intraoral scanner and the Viewbox4 software was used for the measurements. The following parameters were scored: inclination of the lower and upper incisors (IMPA and I^SN) and anterior crowding (Little index). The included patients were recalled for a clinical periodontal follow-up examination and the following parameters were evaluated: buccal and lingual GR (mm) of incisors and canines, bleeding of probing score, plaque score, and gingival phenotype. The digital cast analysis showed a mean Little index of 7.78 (SD 5.83) and 1.39 (SD 0.79), respectively, before and after treatment. The initial and final cephalometric analyses showed an I^SN of 103.53° and 105.78° (SD 7.21) and IMPA of 91.3°and 95.1°, respectively. At the follow-up periodontal visits, the patients showed an overall low oral hygiene with bleeding at probing in 66.6% and plaque in the anterior area in 76.2% of patients. From the total examined 240 teeth of the frontal sextants, three patients had GR (from 1 to 6.5 mm): in the upper arch two at canines and one at central incisor, whereas in the lower arch two at central and one at lateral incisors. The gingival phenotype was thick in 55% of cases. The lingual-to-lingual retainers at follow-up were present in 61.9% of patients. A slight increased risk for buccal GR development was found only in correlation with the presence of fixed retainer and thin gingival phenotype mainly in patients with gingivitis. Thus, non-extraction orthodontic treatment performed with controlled forces and biomechanics seems to not affect the development of GR or the periodontal health after retention.

Gingival Recessions and Periodontal Status after Minimum 2-Year-Retention Post-Non-Extraction Orthodontic Treatment