Literature DB >> 22442769

Effects of 10 cleaning instruments on four different implant surfaces.

Petra Schmage1, Julia Thielemann, Ibrahim Nergiz, Thomas M Scorziello, Peter Pfeiffer.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a variety of implant cleaning instruments on different implant surfaces, specifically surface roughness and cleaning efficacy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Biofilm layers of Streptococcus mutans were cultivated on titanium disks with four different surface structures (polished, grit-blasted, acid-etched, and acid-etched/grit-blasted). Five disks each were cleaned using nine mechanical implant cleaning instruments or an erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser. Surface roughness (average, Ra; maximum, Rz) and waviness (Lr) were evaluated by two-dimensional laser profilometry. Surface structure damage and cleaning scores were assessed by scanning electron microscopy. Statistical analyses of the results were performed with one- and two-way analyses of variance and Bonferroni-Dunn multiple-comparison post hoc analysis (α = .05).
RESULTS: Ra and Rz values for the acid-etched surfaces and Ra, Rz, and Lr values for the polished and the grit-blasted surfaces showed no significant differences between the different cleaning methods or cleaning instruments compared to the control (not cultured, not cleaned) groups. Significantly lower Ra and Rz values on grit-blasted/acid-etched implant surfaces were found following use of the Sonic-Flex clean with prophylaxis brush and the plastic curette compared to Satelec ProphyMax with Periosoft curette. Ra and Rz values of the different implant structure surfaces before cleaning were significantly different between all implant surfaces except for the polished compared to the acid-etched surfaces.
CONCLUSIONS: Cleaning effect and alterations of the implant surfaces were strongly dependent on the implant cleaning method used.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22442769

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants        ISSN: 0882-2786            Impact factor:   2.804


  6 in total

Review 1.  Microbial Profiles and Detection Techniques in Peri-Implant Diseases: a Systematic Review.

Authors:  Miguel Padial-Molina; Jesús López-Martínez; Francisco O'Valle; Pablo Galindo-Moreno
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Res       Date:  2016-09-09

2.  Scaling of titanium implants entrains inflammation-induced osteolysis.

Authors:  Michal Eger; Nir Sterer; Tamar Liron; David Kohavi; Yankel Gabet
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-01-06       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Potential Causes of Titanium Particle and Ion Release in Implant Dentistry: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Rafael Delgado-Ruiz; Georgios Romanos
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2018-11-13       Impact factor: 5.923

4.  Evaluation of decontamination methods of oral biofilms formed on screw-shaped, rough and machined surface implants: an ex vivo study.

Authors:  Motohiro Otsuki; Masahiro Wada; Masaya Yamaguchi; Shigetada Kawabata; Yoshinobu Maeda; Kazunori Ikebe
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2020-04-22

5.  Surface alterations following instrumentation with a nylon or metal brush evaluated with confocal microscopy.

Authors:  Young-Sung Kim; Jun-Beom Park; Youngkyung Ko
Journal:  J Periodontal Implant Sci       Date:  2019-09-21       Impact factor: 2.614

6.  In vitro evaluation of chemical decontamination of titanium discs.

Authors:  Yuki Ichioka; Jan Derks; Gunnar Dahlén; Tord Berglundh; Lena Larsson
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-11-23       Impact factor: 4.379

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.