Table 3 Quantitative analysis of CFU counts (× 105) from rough and machined surface implants after cleansing by each method
Rough surface
Cont
G
US
Air
Rot
Las
Median
137.5
3.4
46.5
13.0
4.8
16.3
Min
73.0
0.3
6.8
0.5
0.6
3.0
Max
785.0
27.0
240.0
35.5
37.0
34.0
Machine surface
Cont
G
US
Air
Rot
Las
Median
84.5
0.9
8.5
3.2
3.3
...
Table 2 Qualitative evaluation by SEM analysis of micro- and macrothread areas of machined surface implants
Machined surface (microthread)
No effect
Fair
Good
Excellent
G
+
US
+
Air
+
Rot
+
Las
+
Machined surface (macrothread)
No effect
Fair
Good
Excellent
G
+
US...
Table 1 Qualitative evaluation by SEM analysis of micro- and macrothread areas of rough surface implants
Rough surface (microthread)
No effect
Fair
Good
Excellent
G
+
US
+
Air
+
Rot
+
Las
+
Rough surface (macrothread)
No effect
Fair
Good
Excellent
G
+
US
...
Figure 6. Comparison of cleansability of each decontamination method on the different implant surfaces. Asterisk indicates p < 0.05
Figure 5. Quantitative analysis of CFU counts on rough and machined surface implants after cleansing by each method. Asterisk represents vs Cont; a, vs G; b, vs US; c, vs Air; d, vs Rot; e, vs Las which indicates p < 0.05
Figure 4. SEM analysis of 4 areas. 1 Rough surface—microthread area. 2 Rough surface—macrothread area. 3 Machined surface—microthread area. 4 Machined surface—macrothread area
Figure 3. Decontamination methods. a Gauze soaked in saline applied using a sawing motion. b Ultrasonic scaler (SUPRASSON P-MAX, Satelec-Acteon group, Bordeaux, France, power setting: P5, tip: Implant Protect IP3L/R). c Air abrasives (AIR-FLOW MASTER PIEZON®, EMS, Nyon, Switzerland, power setting: water flow 100%, air pressure 75%, powder: AIR-FLOW® PERIO POWDER, nozzle: PERIO-FLOW®...
Figure 2. GC Aadva® implant; 3.3-mm diameter, 8-mm length
Surface characteristics
Through SEM analysis and CFU counts, it was demonstrated that, except for the Er:YAG laser, decontamination of the machined surface implant was easier than that of the rough surface implant regardless of decontamination method. Gauze soaked in saline and the ultrasonic scaler demonstrated a statistically significant difference in CFU counts between the two surfaces. ...
Our results are also in accordance with their results in terms of the high cleansability of the rotary metal instrument. In addition, the cotton pellet showed moderate cleansability among the tested methods, but the cleansing time for the cotton pellet (60 s) was shorter than that of the titanium brush with (120 s + 60 s)/without (120 s) photodynamic therapy. If adjusting the d...
Charalampakis et al. examined the effectiveness of mechanical and chemical decontamination methods using titanium disks contaminated intraorally. They employed four decontamination methods: gauze in saline, chlorhexidine, delmopinol, and an essential oil mixture. The authors discovered there was no significant difference in CFU counts among the four methods. In the present study, our findin...
However, the rotary stainless steel instrument created numerous shallow scratches, especially on machined surface implants. John et al. compared the supragingival plaque cleansability of a rotary titanium instrument to that of a stainless metal curette on contaminated titanium disks. The residual biofilm area left on implant treated with the rotary titanium instrument was significantl...
However, the rotary stainless steel instrument created numerous shallow scratches, especially on machined surface implants. John et al. compared the supragingival plaque cleansability of a rotary titanium instrument to that of a stainless metal curette on contaminated titanium disks. The residual biofilm area left on implant treated with the rotary titanium instrument was significantl...
Regarding the air abrasives, the cleansing effect in the SEM analysis was also as considerable as that achieved by the ultrasonic scaler in the present study, in contrast to the results of the aforementioned study. Louropoulou et al. also stated in their systematic review that an air-powder abrasive system with sodium bicarbonate powder could cleanse contaminated rough/smooth implant surface...
The SEM analysis demonstrated that three different rough surface disks harbored complex and firmly attached biofilms after gauze scrubbing irrespective of which antiseptic or saline was used.
However, the disks with a turned surface hosted fewer biofilm clusters after scrubbing. This finding is in line with our result showing the better cleansability of gauze soaked in saline on the m...
Augthun et al. examined the cultivability of mouse fibroblasts after cleansing machined or plasma-splayed surface implants carried on acrylic plates that had been contaminated with supragingival plaque from individuals. A plastic hand scaler and an air-abrasive system with sodium bicarbonate powder were employed in their study. A similar number of viable fibroblasts were observed after clean...
Discussion
Study design
This study was performed following an ex vivo design to overcome the drawbacks of previous studies. One particular difference in this study was the use of a commercially available screw-shaped implant. As the implant shape and design have rather complicated macro- and microstructures compared with titanium disks or different forms of titanium commonly used in experi...
Results
Complications
During the experiment, three participants experienced small ulcers caused by the implants carried on the splints; however, it did not affect their daily life. Additionally, there were no signs of gingival inflammation in any participant.
SEM analysis (Fig 4, Tables 1 and 2)
Rough surface implants
G and Rot achieved relatively clean implant surfaces compared with Las in...
This study protocol was approved by the ethical committee of Osaka University (H26.E-36).
SEM analysis
The SEM analysis was performed as previously described. The decontaminated implant samples were fixed with 2% glutaraldehyde-RPMI 1640 immediately for 1 h at room temperature and washed with distilled water. Then, the samples were dehydrated with 100% t-butyl alcohol and freeze-dried. Finall...
At the end of the 4-day experimental period, the implants were carefully removed from the splints by breaking the resin caps that held them in place. Each implant was randomly assigned to a treatment method (Cont, control (no decontamination); G, gauze soaked in saline; US, ultrasonic scaler (SUPRASSON P-MAX, Satelec-Acteon Group, Bordeaux, France; power setting: P5, tip: Implant Protect IP3L/R); ...
Materials and methods
Study subjects
Eleven participants, nine men and two women between 28 and 42 years of age (mean age 31.3 ± 4.6), were recruited as the study subjects. All participants provided informed consent verbally. Study information was disseminated to participants both verbally and in written form. The inclusion criteria were as follows:
Generally healthy subjects
Dent...
Background
Dental implants are now used broadly for recovering loss of masticatory function and esthetics. Although it has been revealed that dental implants can often survive long term, biological and mechanical complications may arise. Recent cross-sectional and retrospective studies noted a higher prevalence of peri-implantitis at the implant and subject level than previously considered. Add...
Abstract
Background
To evaluate the effect of several representative decontamination methods of oral biofilms on different implant surfaces.
Material and methods
Eleven participants wore a hard resin splint carrying 6 rough (GC Aadva® implant; 3.3-mm diameter, 8-mm length) or machined (not commercially available) surface implants for 4 days to accumulate dental plaque naturally on the ti...