Literature DB >> 20127378

Cleaning ability and induced dentin loss of a magnetostrictive ultrasonic instrument at different power settings.

Kathrin Lampe Bless1, Beatrice Sener, Jürg Dual, Thomas Attin, Patrick R Schmidlin.   

Abstract

Some laboratory studies have evaluated the oscillation mode of ultrasonic scalers. None of them recorded its influence on calculus removal and quantified dental hard tissue loss. This study aimed to compare the performance of a magnetostrictive ultrasonic instrument at different power settings in vitro in relation to the tip oscillation activity. The oscillation activity of the straight Slimline® insert in the Cavitron® ultrasonic scaling device was analyzed at five different power settings with the help of two laser vibrometers. The performance of this instrument was tested on 60 roots of human single-rooted teeth. Twelve roots each were randomly assigned to be instrumented at a given power setting. Every root was instrumented for 120 s at a standardized instrumentation force of 0.1 ± 0.05 N. In addition, another 30 periodontally involved roots with subgingival calculus were instrumented accordingly to assess the calculus removal potential. The surface characteristics after instrumentation were analyzed under scanning electron microscope. The instrumentation at minimum power setting resulted in an mean increase of the root surface roughness of 0.18 ± 0.28 compared to 0.51 ± 0.48 at maximum power setting (P = 0.0327). The loss of dental hard tissue amounted to 11.37 ± 3.64 at minimum compared to 23.37 ± 15.76 at maximum power (P = 0.0010). The higher the power setting, the more calculus was removed. The values of the latter ranged between 4.04 ± 1.87 and 11.26 ± 4.66 mm² of cleaned dentin surface area (P = 0.0065). At lower power settings, a more favorable relation between cleaning ability, loss of dentine, and surface roughness was found.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20127378     DOI: 10.1007/s00784-009-0379-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Investig        ISSN: 1432-6981            Impact factor:   3.573


  25 in total

1.  Acoustic microstreaming: detection and measurement around ultrasonic scalers.

Authors:  B S Khambay; A D Walmsley
Journal:  J Periodontol       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 6.993

2.  A clinical evaluation of hand and ultrasonic instruments on subgingival debridement. 1. With unmodified and modified ultrasonic inserts.

Authors:  M R Dragoo
Journal:  Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Comparative study on the effect of ultrasonic instruments on the root surface in vivo.

Authors:  Fábio André Santos; Márcia Thaís Pochapski; Paola Cristina Leal; Patrícia Panizzi Gimenes-Sakima; Elcio Marcantonio
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2007-12-04       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Ultrasonic scaler oscillations and tooth-surface defects.

Authors:  S C Lea; B Felver; G Landini; A D Walmsley
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 6.116

5.  Root cleaning or root smoothing. An in vivo study.

Authors:  R Oberholzer; K H Rateitschak
Journal:  J Clin Periodontol       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 8.728

Review 6.  Scaling and root planing without overinstrumentation: hand versus power-driven scalers.

Authors:  C L Drisko
Journal:  Curr Opin Periodontol       Date:  1993

7.  A model system to demonstrate the role of cavitational activity in ultrasonic scaling.

Authors:  A D Walmsley; W R Laird; A R Williams
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  1984-09       Impact factor: 6.116

8.  Endotoxin penetration into root cementum of periodontally healthy and diseased human teeth.

Authors:  N M Nakib; N F Bissada; J W Simmelink; S N Goldstine
Journal:  J Periodontol       Date:  1982-06       Impact factor: 6.993

9.  A comparative in vitro study of a magnetostrictive and a piezoelectric ultrasonic scaling instrument.

Authors:  A Busslinger; K Lampe; M Beuchat; B Lehmann
Journal:  J Clin Periodontol       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 8.728

10.  Three-dimensional analyses of ultrasonic scaler oscillations.

Authors:  Simon C Lea; Bernhard Felver; Gabriel Landini; A Damien Walmsley
Journal:  J Clin Periodontol       Date:  2008-10-30       Impact factor: 8.728

View more
  3 in total

1.  Influence of ultrasonic tip distance and orientation on biofilm removal.

Authors:  Stefanie J Gartenmann; Thomas Thurnheer; Thomas Attin; Patrick R Schmidlin
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-05-19       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Static biofilm removal around ultrasonic tips in vitro.

Authors:  Thomas Thurnheer; Elodie Rohrer; Georgios N Belibasakis; Thomas Attin; Patrick R Schmidlin
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-12-08       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 3.  Mechanized scaling with ultrasonics: Perils and proactive measures.

Authors:  Rashmi Paramashivaiah; M L V Prabhuji
Journal:  J Indian Soc Periodontol       Date:  2013-07
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.