IN VITRO EVALUATION OF SURFACE CLEANING METHODS IN TWO DIFFERENT IMPLANT DEFECT ANGULATIONS: A PILOT STUDY
Description
The aim of this study is to investigate the cleaning potential of an air abrasive device with trehalose powder on implant surfaces in comparison to Er:YAG laser application in an vitro model of two different defect angulations. Two standardized study models representing two different defect morphologies with opening angulations of 30°and 60°, were custom-made from clear epoxy resin (Epoart, Polisan, Kocaeli, Turkey) . The defect’s height in each model was 6 mm (down to the 3rd thread) and the defect’s width corresponded to the implants’ diameter (3.75 mm) simulating a semi-circumferential peri-implant defect. After instrumentations, implants were removed carefully from the models. Loosened ink particles were cleaned by gentle water and air spray. Digital color photos were taken in standardized conditions by a digital camera (dark chamber, ISO 125, aperture f/7.1, shutter speed 1/60 s, distance 31.4 cm with a Nikon D5300, Tokyo, Japan), positioned vertically to the implant axis. Twin flash R1C1 wireless close-up Speedlight system (Tokyo, Japan) was used with power settings of ½ from one side. Evaluations on the surface ink remnants were performed with an image processing software (Image J 1.46 r, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA). Image J system was used to scan the areas where the ink remnants were present. The surfaces areas of these surfaces were calculated. The data was collected in excell files where each group can be seen separately. These excel files are attached for the data to be available to the public.
Files
Steps to reproduce
Two different cleaning methods were used on the implant surfaces as follows: 1. Air powder abrasive device (MyLunos®; Dürr Dental Group, Bietigheim-Bissigen, Germany) with trehalose powder (Perio Combi®; 30 µm grain size, Dürr Dental Group, Bietigheim -Bissigen, Germany) and a special hand piece for subgingival instrumentation were used with a nozzle tip parallel to the implant surface for 20 seconds. The nozzle tip was used only once for each implant in horizontal sweeping movements and then discarded (Figure 2a). 2. Er:YAG laser (VersaWave, Delight; Hoya-Con Bio) with a wavelength of 2940 nm was used. The parameters were set at 20 Hz/120 mJ, with a water irrigation according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The pulse width was 200 ms. The quartz chisel tip was selected (1.2- 0.4 mm, rectangular shape) and applied in horizontal sweeping movements for 20 seconds . After both instrumentations, implant surfaces were evaluated for residual stain using digital photographs at the following site locations: Shoulder area (SA), neck of the threads (NT), apically facing thread surface (ATS), area between threads (ABT) . After instrumentations, implants were removed carefully from the models. Loosened ink particles were cleaned by gentle water and air spray. Digital color photos were taken in standardized conditions by a digital camera (dark chamber, ISO 125, aperture f/7.1, shutter speed 1/60 s, distance 31.4 cm with a Nikon D5300, Tokyo, Japan), positioned vertically to the implant axis. Twin flash R1C1 wireless close-up Speedlight system (Tokyo, Japan) was used with power settings of ½ from one side. Evaluations on the surface ink remnants were performed with an image processing software (Image J 1.46 r, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA). For statistical analysis IBM SPSS Statistics 22 (IBM SPSS, Turkey) was used. The normal distribution of the data was assessed by Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro Wilks tests, and the parameters followed the normal distribution. Student t test was used for the paired evaluation of the total cleaning effects of the cleaning methods according to two different defect angulations. Significance was evaluated at p <0.05 level.
Institutions
- Yeditepe Universitesi Dis Hekimligi Fakultesi