Suppr超能文献

三种种植体清创方法的体外清洁潜力。非手术方法的模拟。

In vitro cleaning potential of three implant debridement methods. Simulation of the non-surgical approach.

作者信息

Ronay Valerie, Merlini Andrea, Attin Thomas, Schmidlin Patrick R, Sahrmann Philipp

机构信息

Clinic of Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Cariology, Center of Dental and Oral Medicine and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

出版信息

Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Feb;28(2):151-155. doi: 10.1111/clr.12773. Epub 2016 Jan 22.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To assess the cleaning potential of commonly used implant debridement methods, simulating non-surgical peri-implantitis therapy in vitro.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One-hundred-and-eighty dental implants were ink-stained and mounted in combined soft and hard tissue models, representing peri-implantitis defects with angulations of 30, 60, and 90° covered by a custom-made artificial mucosa. Implants were treated by a dental school graduate and a board-certified periodontist for 120 s with following instruments: Gracey curette, ultrasonic scaler, and an air powder abrasive device with a nozzle for sub-mucosal use utilizing glycine powder. All procedures were repeated 10 times for each instrumentation and defect morphology respectively. Images of the implant surface were taken. Areas with color remnants were planimetrically determined and their cumulative surface area was calculated. Results were tested for statistical differences using two-way anova and Bonferroni correction. Micro-morphologic surface changes were analyzed on scanning electron microscope (SEM) images.

RESULTS

The areas of uncleaned surfaces (%, mean ± standard deviations) for curettes, ultrasonic tips, and air abrasion accounted for 74.70 ± 4.89%, 66.95 ± 8.69% and 33.87 ± 12.59% respectively. The air powder abrasive device showed significantly better results for all defect angulations (P < 0.0001). SEM evaluation displayed considerable surface alterations after instrumentation with Gracey curettes and ultrasonic devices, whereas glycine powder did not result in any surface alterations.

CONCLUSION

A complete surface cleaning could not be achieved regardless of the instrumentation method applied. The air powder abrasive device showed a superior cleaning potential for all defect angulations with better results at wide defects.

摘要

目的

在体外模拟非手术性种植体周围炎治疗,评估常用种植体清创方法的清洁潜力。

材料与方法

180颗牙种植体用墨水染色后安装在软硬组织联合模型中,该模型代表种植体周围炎缺损,角度分别为30°、60°和90°,覆盖定制的人工黏膜。一名牙科学校毕业生和一名获得委员会认证的牙周病医生使用以下器械对种植体进行120秒的处理:格雷斯刮治器、超声洁治器和一种使用甘氨酸粉末的用于黏膜下使用的气粉研磨装置。每种器械和缺损形态分别重复该操作10次。拍摄种植体表面图像。用平面测量法确定有颜色残留的区域,并计算其累积表面积。使用双向方差分析和邦费罗尼校正对结果进行统计学差异检验。在扫描电子显微镜(SEM)图像上分析微观形态表面变化。

结果

刮治器、超声洁治头和气磨的未清洁表面面积(%,平均值±标准差)分别为74.70±4.89%、66.95±8.69%和33.87±12.59%。气粉研磨装置在所有缺损角度下均显示出显著更好的效果(P<0.0001)。SEM评估显示,使用格雷斯刮治器和超声设备处理后表面有明显改变,而甘氨酸粉末未导致任何表面改变。

结论

无论采用何种器械方法,均无法实现完全的表面清洁。气粉研磨装置在所有缺损角度下均显示出卓越的清洁潜力,在宽缺损处效果更佳。

相似文献

1
In vitro cleaning potential of three implant debridement methods. Simulation of the non-surgical approach.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Feb;28(2):151-155. doi: 10.1111/clr.12773. Epub 2016 Jan 22.
2
In vitro cleaning potential of three different implant debridement methods.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Mar;26(3):314-9. doi: 10.1111/clr.12322. Epub 2013 Dec 26.
3
Location of unaccessible implant surface areas during debridement in simulated peri-implantitis therapy.
BMC Oral Health. 2017 Nov 28;17(1):137. doi: 10.1186/s12903-017-0428-8.
4
Cleaning potential of glycine air-flow application in an in vitro peri-implantitis model.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013 Jun;24(6):666-70. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02445.x. Epub 2012 Mar 12.
5
Cleaning potential of different air abrasive powders and their impact on implant surface roughness.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2020 Feb;22(1):96-104. doi: 10.1111/cid.12875. Epub 2019 Dec 13.
7
Cleaning and modification of intraorally contaminated titanium discs with calcium phosphate powder abrasive treatment.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013 Nov;24(11):1238-46. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02536.x. Epub 2012 Aug 8.
8
9
In vitro efficacy of three different implant surface decontamination methods in three different defect configurations.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019 Jun;30(6):550-558. doi: 10.1111/clr.13441. Epub 2019 May 8.
10
Comparison of decontamination efficacy of two electrolyte cleaning methods to diode laser, plasma, and air-abrasive devices.
Clin Oral Investig. 2022 Jun;26(6):4549-4558. doi: 10.1007/s00784-022-04421-0. Epub 2022 Mar 24.

引用本文的文献

1
Clinically relevant aspects of professional follow-up care for implant patients.
Front Dent Med. 2025 May 9;6:1565151. doi: 10.3389/fdmed.2025.1565151. eCollection 2025.
2
Effect of air polishing on surface roughness in implant abutments.
Bioinformation. 2024 Nov 5;20(11):1667-1670. doi: 10.6026/9732063002001667. eCollection 2024.
7
Titanium particles in peri-implantitis: distribution, pathogenesis and prospects.
Int J Oral Sci. 2023 Nov 23;15(1):49. doi: 10.1038/s41368-023-00256-x.
8
Biofilm Removal from In Vitro Narrow Geometries Using Single and Dual Pulse Er:YAG Laser Photoacoustic Irrigation.
Microorganisms. 2023 Aug 17;11(8):2102. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms11082102.
9
research of oral microscope-assisted implant surface decontamination.
Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2023 Jun 1;41(3):350-355. doi: 10.7518/hxkq.2023.2022509.
10
The efficacy of different implant surface decontamination methods using spectrophotometric analysis: an study.
J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2023 Aug;53(4):295-305. doi: 10.5051/jpis.2203500175. Epub 2022 Dec 2.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验