Department of Periodontology, Center for Dentistry and Oral Medicine (Carolinum), Johann Wolfgang Goethe-University Frankfurt/Main, Frankfurt/Main, Germany.
Private Practice, Frankfurt/Main, Germany.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019 Jun;30(6):550-558. doi: 10.1111/clr.13441. Epub 2019 May 8.
Evaluation of in vitro efficacy of three different implant surface decontamination methods in a peri-implant bone defect model.
A total of 180 implants were stained with indelible red color and distributed to standardized peri-implant bone defect resin models with a circumferential defect angulation of 30°, 60°, or 90° (supraosseous defect). Sixty implants were assigned to each type of defect. All implants were cleaned by the same examiner. For each type of defect, 20 implants were cleaned for 2 min with one of 3 devices: curette (CUR), sonicscaler (SOSC), or air abrasion with glycine powder (APA). Thereafter, photographs were taken from both sides of each implant and the cumulative uncleaned implant surface area was measured by color recognition technique. Scanning electron micrographs (SEM) were examined to assess morphologic surface damages.
The cleaning efficacy as percent (%) of residual color was significantly different for each of the 3 defect angulations (p < 0.001) for each treatment device: 30° CUR: 53.44% > SOSC: 19.69% > APA: 8.03%; 60° CUR: 57.13% > SOSC: 11.4% > APA: 0.13%; and 90° CUR: 48.1% > SOSC: 13.07% > APA: 0.58%. The differences between the three different cleaning modalities within each defect type were also significant (p < 0.005). SEM micrographs showed no surface damages after the use of APA.
Air powder abrasion is the most efficient (APA > SOSC > CUR) and less surface damaging treatment modality for each defect angulation in this in vitro model.
评估三种不同种植体表面去污方法在种植体周骨缺损模型中的体外疗效。
将 180 个种植体用不可擦除的红色染料染色,并分布在具有 30°、60°或 90°(骨上缺损)环形缺损角度的标准化种植体周骨缺损树脂模型中。每个类型的缺损有 60 个种植体。所有种植体均由同一位检查者清洁。对于每种类型的缺损,用三种器械中的一种清洁 20 个种植体 2 分钟:刮匙(CUR)、超声洁牙机(SOSC)或载糖氨酸粉末的空气喷砂(APA)。然后,从每个种植体的两侧拍摄照片,并通过颜色识别技术测量未清洁的种植体表面面积的总和。通过扫描电子显微镜(SEM)检查评估形态表面损伤。
对于每个治疗器械,三种不同的缺损角度(p<0.001)的清洁效果(以残留颜色的百分比[%]表示)差异显著:30°CUR:53.44%>SOSC:19.69%>APA:8.03%;60°CUR:57.13%>SOSC:11.4%>APA:0.13%;90°CUR:48.1%>SOSC:13.07%>APA:0.58%。在每种类型的缺陷内,三种不同清洁方式之间的差异也具有统计学意义(p<0.005)。SEM 显微照片显示 APA 后无表面损伤。
在该体外模型中,对于每个角度的缺损,空气粉末喷砂(APA> SOSS > CUR)是最有效的(效率最高)且对表面损伤最小的治疗方式。