Ozgu Ipek, Ustun Kemal
Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Periodontology, Akdeniz University;
Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Periodontology, Akdeniz University.
J Vis Exp. 2025 Mar 14(217). doi: 10.3791/67778.
Various mechanical methods have been proposed for decontaminating dental implant surfaces with varying success. This in vitro study evaluated the decontamination efficiency of an air abrasion (AA) system with erythritol powder, a polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) ultrasonic tip, and titanium curettes (TIT) and their effects on implant surface topography using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). A total of 60 implants were stained with permanent red ink and placed in 3D-printed Class 1A and Class 1B peri-implantitis defects, forming six groups (n=10 per group) based on defect type and treatment protocol. Additionally, one positive and one negative control implant was used. Erythritol powder, PEEK ultrasonic tips, and titanium curettes were applied for 2 min in Class 1A defects and 3 minutes in Class 1B defects. Residual red ink areas were quantified with digital software, and implant surface changes were analyzed using SEM and EDS. None of the methods achieved complete decontamination. However, erythritol powder was significantly the most effective, leaving a residual ink rate of 24% ± 6% (p < 0.001). PEEK ultrasonic tips resulted in 41% ± 4% residual ink, while titanium curettes left 55% ± 3%. Significant differences were observed among all methods. No significant difference in decontamination efficacy was found between Class 1A and Class 1B defects. SEM analysis showed minimal surface damage with erythritol powder and PEEK tips, whereas titanium curettes caused moderate to severe damage. Based on both decontamination efficiency and surface preservation, erythritol powder and PEEK tips are safe and effective options for peri-implantitis treatment, while titanium curettes are less effective and cause considerable surface damage. These findings may assist clinicians in peri-implantitis treatment planning.
已经提出了各种机械方法来对牙科种植体表面进行去污处理,但成功率各不相同。这项体外研究评估了使用赤藓糖醇粉末的空气喷砂(AA)系统、聚醚醚酮(PEEK)超声探头和钛刮治器的去污效率,以及它们使用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)对种植体表面形貌的影响。总共60个种植体用永久性红墨水染色,并放置在3D打印的1A类和1B类种植体周围炎缺损中,根据缺损类型和治疗方案形成六组(每组n = 10)。此外,使用了一个阳性对照种植体和一个阴性对照种植体。在1A类缺损中使用赤藓糖醇粉末、PEEK超声探头和钛刮治器2分钟,在1B类缺损中使用3分钟。用数字软件对残留红墨水区域进行定量,并使用SEM和EDS分析种植体表面变化。没有一种方法能实现完全去污。然而,赤藓糖醇粉末明显是最有效的,残留墨水率为24%±6%(p < 0.001)。PEEK超声探头导致41%±4%的残留墨水,而钛刮治器留下55%±3%。所有方法之间观察到显著差异。在1A类和1B类缺损之间未发现去污效果的显著差异。SEM分析显示,赤藓糖醇粉末和PEEK探头对表面造成的损伤最小,而钛刮治器造成中度至重度损伤。基于去污效率和表面保存,赤藓糖醇粉末和PEEK探头是种植体周围炎治疗的安全有效选择,而钛刮治器效果较差并会造成相当大的表面损伤。这些发现可能有助于临床医生进行种植体周围炎的治疗规划。