The efficacy of different implant surface decontamination methods using spectrophotometric analysis: an in vitro study.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Roberto Giffi, Davide Pietropaoli, Leonardo Mancini, Francesco Tarallo, Philipp Sahrmann, Enrico Marchetti
{"title":"The efficacy of different implant surface decontamination methods using spectrophotometric analysis: an <i>in vitro</i> study.","authors":"Roberto Giffi,&nbsp;Davide Pietropaoli,&nbsp;Leonardo Mancini,&nbsp;Francesco Tarallo,&nbsp;Philipp Sahrmann,&nbsp;Enrico Marchetti","doi":"10.5051/jpis.2203500175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Various methods have been proposed to achieve the nearly complete decontamination of the surface of implants affected by peri-implantitis. We investigated the <i>in vitro</i> debridement efficiency of multiple decontamination methods (Gracey curettes [GC], glycine air-polishing [G-Air], erythritol air-polishing [E-Air] and titanium brushes [TiB]) using a novel spectrophotometric ink-model in 3 different bone defect settings (30°, 60°, and 90°).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-five dental implants were stained with indelible ink and mounted in resin models, which simulated standardised peri-implantitis defects with different bone defect angulations (30°, 60°, and 90°). After each run of instrumentation, the implants were removed from the resin model, and the ink was dissolved in ethanol (97%). A spectrophotometric analysis was performed to detect colour remnants in order to measure the cumulative uncleaned surface area of the implants. Scanning electron microscopy images were taken to assess micromorphological surface changes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Generally, the 60° bone defects were the easiest to debride, and the 30° defects were the most difficult (ink absorption peak: 0.26±0.04 for 60° defects; 0.32±0.06 for 30° defects; 0.27±0.04 for 90° defects). The most effective debridement method was TiB, independently of the bone defect type (TiB vs. GC: <i>P</i><0.0001; TiB vs. G-Air: <i>P</i>=0.0017; TiB vs. GE-Air: <i>P=</i>0.0007). GE-Air appeared to be the least efficient method for biofilm debridement.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>T-brushes seem to be a promising decontamination method compared to the other techniques, whereas G-Air was less aggressive on the implant surface. The use of a spectrophotometric model was shown to be a novel but promising assessment method for <i>in vitro</i> ink studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":48795,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science","volume":"53 4","pages":"295-305"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/5c/28/jpis-53-295.PMC10465813.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2203500175","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose: Various methods have been proposed to achieve the nearly complete decontamination of the surface of implants affected by peri-implantitis. We investigated the in vitro debridement efficiency of multiple decontamination methods (Gracey curettes [GC], glycine air-polishing [G-Air], erythritol air-polishing [E-Air] and titanium brushes [TiB]) using a novel spectrophotometric ink-model in 3 different bone defect settings (30°, 60°, and 90°).

Methods: Forty-five dental implants were stained with indelible ink and mounted in resin models, which simulated standardised peri-implantitis defects with different bone defect angulations (30°, 60°, and 90°). After each run of instrumentation, the implants were removed from the resin model, and the ink was dissolved in ethanol (97%). A spectrophotometric analysis was performed to detect colour remnants in order to measure the cumulative uncleaned surface area of the implants. Scanning electron microscopy images were taken to assess micromorphological surface changes.

Results: Generally, the 60° bone defects were the easiest to debride, and the 30° defects were the most difficult (ink absorption peak: 0.26±0.04 for 60° defects; 0.32±0.06 for 30° defects; 0.27±0.04 for 90° defects). The most effective debridement method was TiB, independently of the bone defect type (TiB vs. GC: P<0.0001; TiB vs. G-Air: P=0.0017; TiB vs. GE-Air: P=0.0007). GE-Air appeared to be the least efficient method for biofilm debridement.

Conclusions: T-brushes seem to be a promising decontamination method compared to the other techniques, whereas G-Air was less aggressive on the implant surface. The use of a spectrophotometric model was shown to be a novel but promising assessment method for in vitro ink studies.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

用分光光度法分析不同种植体表面去污方法的效果:体外研究。
目的:为了实现种植体周围炎影响的种植体表面的几乎完全去污,已经提出了各种方法。我们使用一种新型的分光光度墨水模型,在3种不同的骨缺损设置(30°、60°和90°)下,研究了多种去污染方法(Gracey cuttes [GC]、甘氨酸空气抛光[G-Air]、赤藓糖醇空气抛光[E-Air]和钛刷[TiB])的体外清创效率。方法:采用不褪色墨水对45颗种植体进行染色,建立树脂模型,模拟不同骨缺损角度(30°、60°和90°)的种植体周围炎缺损。每次运行仪器后,将植入物从树脂模型中取出,将墨水溶解在乙醇中(97%)。进行分光光度分析以检测颜色残留,以测量植入物的累积未清洁表面积。扫描电镜图像评估微观形态学表面的变化。结果:一般情况下,60°骨缺损最容易清除,30°骨缺损最难清除(60°骨缺损墨水吸收峰:0.26±0.04;30°缺陷0.32±0.06;90°缺陷0.27±0.04)。最有效的清创方法是TiB,与骨缺损类型无关(TiB vs. GC: PP=0.0017;TiB vs. GE-Air: P=0.0007)。GE-Air似乎是生物膜清创效果最差的方法。结论:与其他技术相比,t刷似乎是一种很有前途的去污方法,而G-Air对种植体表面的侵蚀较小。使用分光光度法模型被证明是一种新颖而有前途的体外墨水研究评估方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.30%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Journal of Periodontal & Implant Science (JPIS) is a peer-reviewed and open-access journal providing up-to-date information relevant to professionalism of periodontology and dental implantology. JPIS is dedicated to global and extensive publication which includes evidence-based original articles, and fundamental reviews in order to cover a variety of interests in the field of periodontal as well as implant science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信