Department of Periodontology, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.
J Periodontal Res. 2012 Oct;47(5):608-15. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0765.2012.01473.x. Epub 2012 Apr 12.
The ideal instrument for initial periodontal therapy should enable the removal of all extraneous substances from the root surfaces without any iatrogenic effects. Because of that the objective of this study is to analyse and to compare the root surface roughness after using Gracey curettes, termination diamond burs (40 μm), a piezo-ceramic ultrasonic scaler and a piezosurgery ultrasonic scaler using confocal microscopy and scanning electron microscopy.
A 2 mm × 2 mm interproximal root area of 20 teeth (n = 40 surfaces) was evaluated by confocal microscopy (×20 magnification) and scanning electron microscopy (×50 to ×1000 magnification). Teeth were randomly assigned to the following four groups: Gracey curettes with 15 vertical strokes; termination diamond burs (40 μm) at 3000 r.p.m.; a piezo-ceramic ultrasonic scaler with a power of 11; and a piezosurgery ultrasonic scaler in mode ROOT with a power of two.
Confocal microscopy revealed that curettes [mean changes in the value of surface roughness average reduced by 0.11 ± 0.3], piezo-ceramic ultrasonic scaler (roughness average reduced by 0.47 ± 0.93) and piezosurgery ultrasonic scaler (roughness average reduced by 0.62 ± 0.93) left a smoother surface than termination diamond burs (roughness average increased by 0.39 ± 0.18). Statistically significant differences were observed in roughness (p = 0.005) between piezosurgery and termination diamond burs (p = 0.005). No statistically significant differences were between piezosurgery and Gracey curettes (p = 0.140) and between piezosurgery and piezo-ceramic ultrasonic scalers (p = 0.745). Confocal microscopy and scanning electron microscopy showed that piezosurgery seems to leave the smoothest surface. Surfaces treated with termination burs appear to show more scratches and pits.
Three of the four instruments tested for root planing reduced surface roughness; however, the piezosurgery ultrasonic scaler produced the smoothest surface. The termination diamond burs (40 μm) produced a rougher surface than the ultrasonic instruments and the hand curettes. Further clinical studies are needed.
理想的牙周初始治疗器械应能在不产生任何医源性损伤的情况下,彻底清除根面的所有异物。因此,本研究的目的是使用共聚焦显微镜和扫描电子显微镜分析和比较使用 Gracey 刮治器、终末钻石锉(40μm)、压电陶瓷超声洁牙机和压电超声骨刀洁牙后根面的粗糙度。
对 20 颗牙齿(n=40 个表面)的 2mm×2mm 近中根面进行共聚焦显微镜(×20 放大倍数)和扫描电子显微镜(×50 至×1000 放大倍数)评估。牙齿被随机分为以下四组:Gracey 刮治器,刮治 15 下;转速 3000r.p.m.的终末钻石锉(40μm);功率为 11 的压电陶瓷超声洁牙机;功率为 2 的压电超声骨刀 ROOT 模式。
共聚焦显微镜显示,Gracey 刮治器[表面粗糙度平均降低 0.11±0.3]、压电陶瓷超声洁牙机(粗糙度平均降低 0.47±0.93)和压电超声骨刀(粗糙度平均降低 0.62±0.93)留下的根面比终末钻石锉(粗糙度平均增加 0.39±0.18)更光滑。在粗糙度方面,压电超声骨刀与终末钻石锉(p=0.005)和压电超声骨刀与 Gracey 刮治器(p=0.140)之间存在统计学差异。压电陶瓷超声洁牙机与 Gracey 刮治器(p=0.745)和压电陶瓷超声洁牙机与压电超声骨刀(p=0.745)之间无统计学差异。共聚焦显微镜和扫描电子显微镜显示,压电超声骨刀似乎留下了最光滑的表面。经终末钻石锉处理的表面似乎显示出更多的划痕和凹坑。
四种用于根面平整的器械中有三种降低了表面粗糙度;然而,压电超声骨刀产生的表面最光滑。终末钻石锉(40μm)产生的表面粗糙度大于超声器械和手动刮治器。需要进一步的临床研究。