Vaziri Farzane, Rashidi Maybodi Fahimeh, Arab Farashahi Mohammad
Periodontology Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.
J Adv Periodontol Implant Dent. 2022 Nov 6;14(2):84-88. doi: 10.34172/japid.2022.022. eCollection 2022.
The aim of periodontal treatment is to remove bacterial plaque and dental calculus by hand and power-driven instruments. However, the comparison of the effectiveness of these instruments has always been controversial. Therefore, this in vivo study investigated and compared the effects of hand and ultrasonic piezoelectric instruments on the roughness of dental surfaces under an atomic force microscope (AFM). In this study, 35 periodontally hopeless teeth were selected and randomly divided into four groups (n=7). The control group consisted of teeth that had to be extracted for orthodontic or prosthetic treatment (n=7). In group one, scaling and root planing were performed using hand instruments. In other groups, scaling and root planing were performed using piezoelectric ultrasonic instruments with low to high power, respectively. Then the scaled teeth were extracted for analysis under an atomic force microscope. This study showed that root roughness significantly differed between different experimental groups (P<0.027). The root roughness (Rq) in the SRP2 group significantly differed from the control group (P<0.05), while no significant differences were observed between the other groups. Furthermore, the least roughness was observed in the SRP3 group, with the highest roughness in the SRP2 group. Within the limitation of this study, there were no significant differences in surface roughness between different powers of the ultrasonic device.
牙周治疗的目的是通过手动器械和动力驱动器械去除牙菌斑和牙结石。然而，这些器械有效性的比较一直存在争议。因此，这项体内研究在原子力显微镜（AFM）下调查并比较了手动器械和超声压电器械对牙齿表面粗糙度的影响。在本研究中，选取了35颗牙周状况无望保留的牙齿，并随机分为四组（n = 7）。对照组由因正畸或修复治疗而必须拔除的牙齿组成（n = 7）。第一组使用手动器械进行龈上洁治和根面平整。在其他组中，分别使用低功率到高功率的压电超声器械进行龈上洁治和根面平整。然后将洁治后的牙齿拔除，在原子力显微镜下进行分析。本研究表明，不同实验组之间牙根粗糙度存在显著差异（P < 0.027）。SRP2组的牙根粗糙度（Rq）与对照组有显著差异（P < 0.05），而其他组之间未观察到显著差异。此外，SRP3组的粗糙度最小，SRP2组的粗糙度最大。在本研究的局限性内，超声设备不同功率之间的表面粗糙度没有显著差异。
