Department of Medical Biotechnologies, Unit of Periodontics, Università degli Studi di Siena, Siena, Italy.
Department of Medical Biotechnologies, Unit of Dental Material and Fixed Prosthodontics, Università degli Studi di Siena, Siena, Italy.
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2022 Apr;24(2):242-250. doi: 10.1111/cid.13077. Epub 2022 Mar 24.
The current in vitro model aims to evaluate the adjunctive effect on artificial biofilm removal determined by the use of a glycine-powder air-polishing procedure (GPAP) over the ultrasonic debridement (USD) alone when the removal of artificial biofilm on abutment surface is performed. The procedures were carried out also evaluating the impact of the site (mesial, distal, vestibular, and oral) and three different mucosal tunnel depths (2 mm, 4 mm, and 6 mm).
Single tooth implant replacement was simulated. Three different abutment heights together with a prosthetic contour were investigated (2 mm, 4 mm, and 6 mm); custom-made gingival masks were created to mimic peri-implant soft tissue. Biofilm was simulated with an indelible ink. The protocol consisted in two intervention stages for each abutment: (a) USD with PEEK tip plus (b) GPAP. At the end of each intervention, abutments were unscrewed, and standardized photographs were taken. Statistical analysis was carried out to compare residual stain percentage between the two intervention stages and among different sites and mucosal tunnels.
A total of 30 abutments were instrumented. A significant reduction of the percentage of residual staining (PRS) after the combination of GPAP + USD over USD alone was demonstrated (16% vs. 32%; p < 0.05). Moreover, the better performance of the GPAP + USD protocol was observed regardless of the different mucosal tunnel heights and the sites analyzed. Intragroup analysis unveils that the smaller PRS was observed for shallow mucosal tunnels (2 mm) and vestibular sites for both protocols.
GPAP + USD provided adjunctive effect on artificial biofilm removal in comparison to the USD alone. Furthermore, proximal surfaces and deeper mucosal tunnels (4 and 6 mm) showed a reduced instrumentation efficacy for both protocols.
本体外模型旨在评估在对基台表面的人工生物膜进行清除时，使用甘氨酸粉末空气抛光（GPAP）辅助超声清创（USD）对人工生物膜清除效果的影响。同时还评估了不同位置（近中、远中、颊侧和口侧）和三种不同黏膜隧道深度（2mm、4mm 和 6mm）的影响。
模拟单牙种植体替代。研究了三种不同基台高度（2mm、4mm 和 6mm）和一种修复体轮廓；定制了牙龈面膜以模拟种植体周围软组织。使用不可擦除墨水模拟生物膜。该方案包括每个基台的两个干预阶段：（a）使用 PEEK 尖端的 USD 加（b）GPAP。每次干预结束时，拧开基台，并拍摄标准化照片。进行了统计分析，以比较两种干预阶段之间以及不同位置和黏膜隧道之间的残余染色百分比。
共处理了 30 个基台。结果显示，与 USD 单独使用相比，GPAP+USD 联合使用后残余染色百分比（PRS）显著降低（16%比 32%；p<0.05）。此外，无论黏膜隧道高度和分析的位置如何，GPAP+USD 方案的性能均更好。组内分析显示，两种方案中，浅黏膜隧道（2mm）和颊侧的 PRS 更小。
与 USD 单独使用相比，GPAP+USD 对人工生物膜的清除具有辅助作用。此外，对于两种方案，近中面和更深的黏膜隧道（4mm 和 6mm）的器械效能降低。
