Cargando…

A comparative evaluation of the efficacy of manual, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic instruments - an in vitro profilometric and SEM study

OBJECTIVES: The debridement of diseased root surface is usually performed by mechanical scaling and root planing using manual and power driven instruments. Many new designs in ultrasonic powered scaling tips have been developed. However, their effectiveness as compared to manual curettes has always...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: SINGH, Sumita, UPPOOR, Ashita, NAYAK, Dilip
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru da Universidade de São Paulo 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3928767/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22437673
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572012000100005
_version_ 1782304312782749696
author SINGH, Sumita
UPPOOR, Ashita
NAYAK, Dilip
author_facet SINGH, Sumita
UPPOOR, Ashita
NAYAK, Dilip
author_sort SINGH, Sumita
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The debridement of diseased root surface is usually performed by mechanical scaling and root planing using manual and power driven instruments. Many new designs in ultrasonic powered scaling tips have been developed. However, their effectiveness as compared to manual curettes has always been debatable. Thus, the objective of this in vitro study was to comparatively evaluate the efficacy of manual, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic instrumentation on periodontally involved extracted teeth using profilometer and scanning electron microscope (SEM). MATERIAL AND METHODS: 30 periodontally involved extracted human teeth were divided into 3 groups. The teeth were instrumented with hand and ultrasonic instruments resembling clinical application. In Group A all teeth were scaled with a new universal hand curette (Hu Friedy Gracey After Five Vision curette; Hu Friedy, Chicago, USA). In Group B Cavitron(TM) FSI - SLI(TM) ultrasonic device with focused spray slimline inserts (Dentsply International Inc., York, PA, USA) were used. In Group C teeth were scaled with an EMS piezoelectric ultrasonic device with prototype modified PS inserts. The surfaces were analyzed by a Precision profilometer to measure the surface roughness (Ra value in µm) consecutively before and after the instrumentation. The samples were examined under SEM at magnifications ranging from 17x to 300x and 600x. RESULTS: The mean Ra values (µm) before and after instrumentation in all the three groups A, B and C were tabulated. After statistically analyzing the data, no significant difference was observed in the three experimental groups. Though there was a decrease in the percentage reduction of Ra values consecutively from group A to C. CONCLUSION: Within the limits of the present study, given that the manual, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic instruments produce the same surface roughness, it can be concluded that their efficacy for creating a biologically compatible surface of periodontally diseased teeth is similar.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3928767
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru da Universidade de São Paulo
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39287672014-02-24 A comparative evaluation of the efficacy of manual, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic instruments - an in vitro profilometric and SEM study SINGH, Sumita UPPOOR, Ashita NAYAK, Dilip J Appl Oral Sci Original Articles OBJECTIVES: The debridement of diseased root surface is usually performed by mechanical scaling and root planing using manual and power driven instruments. Many new designs in ultrasonic powered scaling tips have been developed. However, their effectiveness as compared to manual curettes has always been debatable. Thus, the objective of this in vitro study was to comparatively evaluate the efficacy of manual, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic instrumentation on periodontally involved extracted teeth using profilometer and scanning electron microscope (SEM). MATERIAL AND METHODS: 30 periodontally involved extracted human teeth were divided into 3 groups. The teeth were instrumented with hand and ultrasonic instruments resembling clinical application. In Group A all teeth were scaled with a new universal hand curette (Hu Friedy Gracey After Five Vision curette; Hu Friedy, Chicago, USA). In Group B Cavitron(TM) FSI - SLI(TM) ultrasonic device with focused spray slimline inserts (Dentsply International Inc., York, PA, USA) were used. In Group C teeth were scaled with an EMS piezoelectric ultrasonic device with prototype modified PS inserts. The surfaces were analyzed by a Precision profilometer to measure the surface roughness (Ra value in µm) consecutively before and after the instrumentation. The samples were examined under SEM at magnifications ranging from 17x to 300x and 600x. RESULTS: The mean Ra values (µm) before and after instrumentation in all the three groups A, B and C were tabulated. After statistically analyzing the data, no significant difference was observed in the three experimental groups. Though there was a decrease in the percentage reduction of Ra values consecutively from group A to C. CONCLUSION: Within the limits of the present study, given that the manual, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic instruments produce the same surface roughness, it can be concluded that their efficacy for creating a biologically compatible surface of periodontally diseased teeth is similar. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru da Universidade de São Paulo 2012 /pmc/articles/PMC3928767/ /pubmed/22437673 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572012000100005 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
SINGH, Sumita
UPPOOR, Ashita
NAYAK, Dilip
A comparative evaluation of the efficacy of manual, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic instruments - an in vitro profilometric and SEM study
title A comparative evaluation of the efficacy of manual, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic instruments - an in vitro profilometric and SEM study
title_full A comparative evaluation of the efficacy of manual, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic instruments - an in vitro profilometric and SEM study
title_fullStr A comparative evaluation of the efficacy of manual, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic instruments - an in vitro profilometric and SEM study
title_full_unstemmed A comparative evaluation of the efficacy of manual, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic instruments - an in vitro profilometric and SEM study
title_short A comparative evaluation of the efficacy of manual, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic instruments - an in vitro profilometric and SEM study
title_sort comparative evaluation of the efficacy of manual, magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic instruments - an in vitro profilometric and sem study
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3928767/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22437673
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572012000100005
work_keys_str_mv AT singhsumita acomparativeevaluationoftheefficacyofmanualmagnetostrictiveandpiezoelectricultrasonicinstrumentsaninvitroprofilometricandsemstudy
AT uppoorashita acomparativeevaluationoftheefficacyofmanualmagnetostrictiveandpiezoelectricultrasonicinstrumentsaninvitroprofilometricandsemstudy
AT nayakdilip acomparativeevaluationoftheefficacyofmanualmagnetostrictiveandpiezoelectricultrasonicinstrumentsaninvitroprofilometricandsemstudy
AT singhsumita comparativeevaluationoftheefficacyofmanualmagnetostrictiveandpiezoelectricultrasonicinstrumentsaninvitroprofilometricandsemstudy
AT uppoorashita comparativeevaluationoftheefficacyofmanualmagnetostrictiveandpiezoelectricultrasonicinstrumentsaninvitroprofilometricandsemstudy
AT nayakdilip comparativeevaluationoftheefficacyofmanualmagnetostrictiveandpiezoelectricultrasonicinstrumentsaninvitroprofilometricandsemstudy