본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

The efficacy of different implant surface decontamination methods using spectrophotometric analysis: an in vitro study

2

조회

0

다운로드

3

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류치의학

초록

Purpose: Various methods have been proposed to achieve the nearly complete decontamination of the surface of implants affected by peri-implantitis. We investigated the in vitro debridement efficiency of multiple decontamination methods (Gracey curettes [GC], glycine air-polishing [G-Air], erythritol air-polishing [E-Air] and titanium brushes [TiB]) using a novel spectrophotometric ink-model in 3 different bone defect settings (30°, 60°, and 90°). Methods: Forty-five dental implants were stained with indelible ink and mounted in resin models, which simulated standardised peri-implantitis defects with different bone defect angulations (30°, 60°, and 90°). After each run of instrumentation, the implants were removed from the resin model, and the ink was dissolved in ethanol (97%). A spectrophotometric analysis was performed to detect colour remnants in order to measure the cumulative uncleaned surface area of the implants. Scanning electron microscopy images were taken to assess micromorphological surface changes. Results: Generally, the 60° bone defects were the easiest to debride, and the 30° defects were the most difficult (ink absorption peak: 0.26±0.04 for 60° defects; 0.32±0.06 for 30° defects; 0.27±0.04 for 90° defects). The most effective debridement method was TiB, independently of the bone defect type (TiB vs. GC: P<0.0001; TiB vs. G-Air: P=0.0017; TiB vs. GE-Air: P=0.0007). GE-Air appeared to be the least efficient method for biofilm debridement. Conclusions: T-brushes seem to be a promising decontamination method compared to the other techniques, whereas G-Air was less aggressive on the implant surface. The use of a spectrophotometric model was shown to be a novel but promising assessment method for in vitro ink studies.

Abstract

Purpose: Various methods have been proposed to achieve the nearly complete decontamination of the surface of implants affected by peri-implantitis. We investigated the in vitro debridement efficiency of multiple decontamination methods (Gracey curettes [GC], glycine air-polishing [G-Air], erythritol air-polishing [E-Air] and titanium brushes [TiB]) using a novel spectrophotometric ink-model in 3 different bone defect settings (30°, 60°, and 90°). Methods: Forty-five dental implants were stained with indelible ink and mounted in resin models, which simulated standardised peri-implantitis defects with different bone defect angulations (30°, 60°, and 90°). After each run of instrumentation, the implants were removed from the resin model, and the ink was dissolved in ethanol (97%). A spectrophotometric analysis was performed to detect colour remnants in order to measure the cumulative uncleaned surface area of the implants. Scanning electron microscopy images were taken to assess micromorphological surface changes. Results: Generally, the 60° bone defects were the easiest to debride, and the 30° defects were the most difficult (ink absorption peak: 0.26±0.04 for 60° defects; 0.32±0.06 for 30° defects; 0.27±0.04 for 90° defects). The most effective debridement method was TiB, independently of the bone defect type (TiB vs. GC: P<0.0001; TiB vs. G-Air: P=0.0017; TiB vs. GE-Air: P=0.0007). GE-Air appeared to be the least efficient method for biofilm debridement. Conclusions: T-brushes seem to be a promising decontamination method compared to the other techniques, whereas G-Air was less aggressive on the implant surface. The use of a spectrophotometric model was shown to be a novel but promising assessment method for in vitro ink studies.

참고문헌 (27)

  1. Berglundh T, "Peri-implant diseases and conditions : consensus report of workgroup 4 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions", J Clin Periodontol, 45(Suppl 20), pp.S286~S291 (2018)
  2. Aglietta M, "A systematic review of the survival and complication rates of implant supported fixed dental prostheses with cantilever extensions after an observation period of at least 5 years", Clin Oral Implants Res, 20, pp.441~451 (2009)
  3. Romandini M, "Discrepancy between patient satisfaction and biologic complication rate in patients rehabilitated with overdentures and not participating in a structured maintenance program after 7 to 12 years of loading", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 34, pp.1143~1151 (2019)
  4. Romandini M, "Clinical signs, symptoms, perceptions, and impact on quality of life in patients suffering from peri-implant diseases: a universityrepresentative cross-sectional study", Clin Oral Implants Res, 32, pp.100~111 (2021)
  5. Romandini M, "Diagnosis of peri-implantitis in the absence of baseline data : a diagnostic accuracy study", Clin Oral Implants Res, 32, pp.297~313 (2021)
  6. Mancini L, "Peri-implant health and diagnostic considerations", Int J Environ Res Public Health, 19, pp.12008~ (2022)
  7. Berglundh J, "Clinical findings and history of bone loss at implant sites", Clin Oral Implants Res, 32, pp.314~323 (2021)
  8. Schmidlin PR, "Peri-implantitis prevalence and treatment in implant-oriented private practices : a cross-sectional postal and Internet survey", Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed, 122, pp.1136~1144 (2012)
  9. Heitz-Mayfield LJ, "Comparative biology of chronic and aggressive periodontitis vs. periimplantitis", Periodontol 2000, 53, pp.167~181 (2010)
  10. Stewart PS, "Antibiotic resistance of bacteria in biofilms", Lancet, 358, pp.135~138 (2001)
  11. Renvert S, "Treatment modalities for peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis", Am J Dent, 26, pp.313~318 (2013)
  12. Lang NP, "Nonsurgical therapy for teeth and implants-When and why?", Periodontol 2000, 79, pp.15~21 (2019)
  13. Gianfreda F, "The effects of ultrasonic scaling and air-abrasive powders on the decontamination of 9 implant-abutment surfaces : scanning electron analysis and in vitro study", Dent J, 10, pp.36~ (2022)
  14. Cha JK, "The effect of five mechanical instrumentation protocols on implant surface topography and roughness : a scanning electron microscope and confocal laser scanning microscope analysis", Clin Oral Implants Res, 30, pp.578~587 (2019)
  15. Renvert S, "Diagnosis and non-surgical treatment of peri-implant diseases and maintenance care of patients with dental implants-Consensus report of working group 3", Int Dent J, 69(Suppl 2), pp.12~17 (2019)
  16. Sahrmann P, "Cleaning potential of glycine air-flow application in an in vitro peri-implantitis model", Clin Oral Implants Res, 24, pp.666~670 (2013)
  17. Matsubara VH, "Cleaning potential of different air abrasive powders and their impact on implant surface roughness", Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 22, pp.96~104 (2020)
  18. Steiger-Ronay V, "Location of unaccessible implant surface areas during debridement in simulated peri-implantitis therapy", BMC Oral Health, 17, pp.137~ (2017)
  19. Sahrmann P, "In vitro cleaning potential of three different implant debridement methods", Clin Oral Implants Res, 26, pp.314~319 (2015)
  20. Pathrose B, "Measurement of absolute fluorescence quantum yield of basic Fuchsin solution using a dual-beam thermal lens technique", J Fluoresc, 24, pp.895~898 (2014)
  21. Beard EJ, "Comparative dataset of experimental and computational attributes of UV", vis absorption spectra, 2019, pp.6, 307~
  22. Berglundh T, "Peri-implantitis and its prevention", Clin Oral Implants Res, 30, pp.150~155 (2019)
  23. Sanz-Martín I, "Significance of implant design on the efficacy of different peri-implantitis decontamination protocols", Clin Oral Investig, 25, pp.3589~3597 (2021)
  24. Keim D, "In vitro efficacy of three different implant surface decontamination methods in three different defect configurations", Clin Oral Implants Res, 30, pp.550~558 (2019)
  25. Ronay V, "In vitro cleaning potential of three implant debridement methods. Simulation of the non-surgical approach", Clin Oral Implants Res, 28, pp.151~155 (2017)
  26. Momber A, "Blast cleaning technology" (2008), Spring-Verlag
  27. Kotsakis GA, "Peri-implantitis is not periodontitis : Scientific discoveries shed light on microbiome-biomaterial interactions that may determine disease phenotype", Periodontol 2000, 86, pp.231~240 (2021)

관련 논문AI추천

Altered bacterial adhesion with changes in roughness of titanium surfaces after implant cleaning김슬기, 박세환, 엄흥식, 이시영, 이재관, 장범석치의학연구원 · Oral Biology Research2016 · 제40권 제1호Comparative evaluation of roughness of titanium surfaces treated by different hygiene instruments김창성, 박정철, 이중석, 정의원, 조규성, 차재국, 최성호, Otgonbayar Unursaikhan대한치주과학회 · Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science2012 · 제42권 제3호The effects of physical decontamination methods on zirconia implant surfaces: a systematic reviewAhsen Khan, Catherine M Miller, Dileep Sharma, Elsa Antunes, Nathan Chiang Ping Tan대한치주과학회 · Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science2021 · 제51권 제5호Regenerative procedure using rotary titanium brush for surface decontamination of peri-implantitis: 3 cases with a 2-year follow-up백민우, 유정아, 이동운, 최성호대한턱관절교합학회 · 구강회복응용과학지2021 · 제37권 제4호Surface alterations following instrumentation with a nylon or metal brush evaluated with confocal microscopy고영경, 김영성, 박준범대한치주과학회 · Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science2019 · 제49권 제5호Decontamination methods to restore the biocompatibility of contaminated titanium surfaces이은미, Jun-Beom Park, KackKyunKim, Seong-Ho Jin, Youngkyung Ko대한치주과학회 · Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science2019 · 제49권 제3호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (6건)