Laboratory Investigation of the Effect of Three Decontamination Methods on Surface Alterations of Dental Implants :.

IF 0.6 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Galen Medical Journal Pub Date : 2025-12-16 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.31661/gmj.vi.3864
Shohreh Khalilzadeh, Soroush Etesami
{"title":"Laboratory Investigation of the Effect of Three Decontamination Methods on Surface Alterations of Dental Implants :.","authors":"Shohreh Khalilzadeh, Soroush Etesami","doi":"10.31661/gmj.vi.3864","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of three decontamination methods on the surface alterations of dental implants and the removal of bacterial plaque from their surfaces.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this experimental in vitro study, 24 titanium cylinders with sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched (SLA) surfaces were contaminated with Staphylococcus aureus to simulate biofilm formation. Samples were randomly assigned to four groups (n=6): titanium curette, diode laser, titanium brush, and saline flush control. Surface roughness (Ra and Rz) was measured using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) before and after cleaning. Colony-forming units (CFUs) were quantified post-treatment to assess bacterial removal. Statistical analyses included Kruskal-Wallis tests, Mann-Whitney pairwise comparisons, and one-way ANOVA with post hoc LSD tests (α=0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surface roughness differed significantly among groups after cleaning (Ra, P=.002; Rz, P=.002). Titanium curette and titanium brush produced smoother surfaces than diode laser and control, with the curette achieving the greatest reduction in roughness. CFU analysis revealed significant differences among groups (F=3.26, P=.043). Contrary to expectations, the saline flush control showed the lowest CFU counts, whereas titanium curette and titanium brush exhibited higher bacterial counts than control (P.05), and diode laser did not differ significantly from control (P=.151).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The titanium curette and titanium brush caused the samples' most significant surface roughness changes. However, the effectiveness of these methods for bacterial plaque removal was lower than that of the control group and the Diode laser group.</p>","PeriodicalId":44017,"journal":{"name":"Galen Medical Journal","volume":"14 S Pt 1","pages":"e3864"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12894812/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Galen Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31661/gmj.vi.3864","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of three decontamination methods on the surface alterations of dental implants and the removal of bacterial plaque from their surfaces.

Materials and methods: In this experimental in vitro study, 24 titanium cylinders with sandblasted, large-grit, acid-etched (SLA) surfaces were contaminated with Staphylococcus aureus to simulate biofilm formation. Samples were randomly assigned to four groups (n=6): titanium curette, diode laser, titanium brush, and saline flush control. Surface roughness (Ra and Rz) was measured using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) before and after cleaning. Colony-forming units (CFUs) were quantified post-treatment to assess bacterial removal. Statistical analyses included Kruskal-Wallis tests, Mann-Whitney pairwise comparisons, and one-way ANOVA with post hoc LSD tests (α=0.05).

Results: Surface roughness differed significantly among groups after cleaning (Ra, P=.002; Rz, P=.002). Titanium curette and titanium brush produced smoother surfaces than diode laser and control, with the curette achieving the greatest reduction in roughness. CFU analysis revealed significant differences among groups (F=3.26, P=.043). Contrary to expectations, the saline flush control showed the lowest CFU counts, whereas titanium curette and titanium brush exhibited higher bacterial counts than control (P.05), and diode laser did not differ significantly from control (P=.151).

Conclusion: The titanium curette and titanium brush caused the samples' most significant surface roughness changes. However, the effectiveness of these methods for bacterial plaque removal was lower than that of the control group and the Diode laser group.

三种去污方法对种植体表面改变影响的实验室研究。
背景:本研究旨在评估三种去污方法对种植体表面改变和去除牙菌斑的效果。材料与方法:在体外实验研究中,24个表面喷砂、大粒度、酸蚀(SLA)的钛瓶被金黄色葡萄球菌污染,模拟生物膜的形成。样本随机分为四组(n=6):钛刮管、二极管激光、钛刷和生理盐水冲洗对照组。清洗前后用扫描电镜(SEM)测量表面粗糙度(Ra和Rz)。菌落形成单位(CFUs)在处理后进行量化以评估细菌去除情况。统计分析采用Kruskal-Wallis检验、Mann-Whitney两两比较和事后LSD检验的单因素方差分析(α=0.05)。结果:清洁后各组表面粗糙度差异有统计学意义(Ra, P= 0.002; Rz, P= 0.002)。钛刮管和钛刷比二极管激光和控制产生更光滑的表面,与刮管实现最大程度的粗糙度降低。CFU分析显示各组间差异有统计学意义(F=3.26, P= 0.043)。与预期相反,生理盐水冲洗组的CFU计数最低,而钛刮管和钛刷组的细菌计数高于对照组(P= 0.05),二极管激光组与对照组无显著差异(P= 0.151)。结论:钛刮管和钛刷对样品表面粗糙度的影响最为显著。然而,这些方法去除细菌斑块的有效性低于对照组和二极管激光组。
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
Galen Medical Journal
Galen Medical Journal MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: GMJ is open access, peer-reviewed journal in English and supported by Noncommunicable Diseases (NCD) Research Center of Fasa University of Medical Sciences that publishing by Salvia Medical Sciences Ltd. GMJ will consider all types of the following scientific papers for publication: - Editorial’s choice - Original Researches - Review articles - Case reports - Case series - Letter (to editors, to authors, etc) - Short communications - Medical Idea
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书