Dennison D K, Huerzeler M B, Quinones C, Caffesse R G
Department of Stomatology-Division of Periodontics, University of Texas Houston-Health Science Center.
J Periodontol. 1994 Oct;65(10):942-8. doi: 10.1902/jop.1994.65.10.942.
The relationship between implant surfaces and decontamination treatments was studied in vitro to determine which implant surfaces were most effectively decontaminated, and which treatment was most effective for treating a particular implant surface. The implants used in the study were press fit cylindrical titanium units with machined, plasma sprayed, and hydroxyapatite-coated surfaces. Radioactive endotoxin (125I-LPS) was prepared from Porphyromonas gingivalis (ATCC 33277). Implants were coated with 125I-LPS and treated by burnishing with a cotton pellet soaked in water, citric acid solution (CA), or 0.12% chlorhexidine (CHX); or treated with an air-powder abrasive (AIR). Radioactivity was determined after each of two treatment cycles. The results for each implant surface were analyzed using ANOVA to determine differences between treatments. The remaining 125I-LPS after two treatment cycles were: for machined implants AIR < CA, with AIR = water = CHX and water = CHX = CA; for plasma sprayed implants AIR < water = CHX = CA; for hydroxyapatite implants AIR = CA < water < CHX. In evaluating treatment modalities, it was found that machined implants were decontaminated more effectively than the other surfaces by all treatments; the exception was citric acid treatment which was equally effective on either machined or hydroxyapatite surfaces. These results indicate that machined implants (without surface coating) are most readily decontaminated by a variety of methods; this characteristic should be considered, since long-term success of implants may involve treating periimplantitis. Further, the results indicate that air abrasives are effective for decontaminating implant surface, with the exception that hydroxyapatite coated surfaces can be treated equally with air abrasives or citric acid.
在体外研究了种植体表面与去污处理之间的关系，以确定哪些种植体表面能被最有效地去污，以及哪种处理方法对特定的种植体表面最有效。该研究中使用的种植体是压配式圆柱形钛制部件，其表面有机械加工面、等离子喷涂面和羟基磷灰石涂层。放射性内毒素（125I-LPS）由牙龈卟啉单胞菌（ATCC 33277）制备。种植体用125I-LPS包被，然后用浸泡在水中、柠檬酸溶液（CA）或0.12%氯己定（CHX）中的棉球进行抛光处理；或采用气粉磨料（AIR）处理。在两个处理周期中的每一个周期后测定放射性。使用方差分析对每个种植体表面的结果进行分析，以确定不同处理之间的差异。两个处理周期后剩余的125I-LPS情况如下：对于机械加工面的种植体，气粉磨料处理（AIR）＜柠檬酸处理（CA），气粉磨料处理（AIR）=水=氯己定处理（CHX）且水=氯己定处理（CHX）=柠檬酸处理（CA）；对于等离子喷涂面的种植体，气粉磨料处理（AIR）＜水=氯己定处理（CHX）=柠檬酸处理（CA）；对于羟基磷灰石涂层的种植体，气粉磨料处理（AIR）=柠檬酸处理（CA）＜水＜氯己定处理（CHX）。在评估处理方式时发现，通过所有处理方法，机械加工面的种植体比其他表面能更有效地去污；柠檬酸处理是个例外，它在机械加工面或羟基磷灰石表面上的效果相同。这些结果表明，机械加工面的种植体（无表面涂层）最容易通过多种方法去污；考虑到种植体的长期成功可能涉及治疗种植体周围炎，这一特性应予以考虑。此外，结果表明气粉磨料对种植体表面去污有效，但羟基磷灰石涂层表面用气粉磨料或柠檬酸处理效果相同。
