Cargando…

Location of unaccessible implant surface areas during debridement in simulated peri-implantitis therapy

BACKGROUND: An in vitro model for peri-implantitis treatment was used to identify areas that are clinically difficult to clean by analyzing the pattern of residual stain after debridement with commonly employed instruments. METHODS: Original data from two previous publications, which simulated surgi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Steiger-Ronay, Valerie, Merlini, Andrea, Wiedemeier, Daniel B., Schmidlin, Patrick R., Attin, Thomas, Sahrmann, Philipp
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5706147/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29183313
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-017-0428-8
_version_ 1783282164659388416
author Steiger-Ronay, Valerie
Merlini, Andrea
Wiedemeier, Daniel B.
Schmidlin, Patrick R.
Attin, Thomas
Sahrmann, Philipp
author_facet Steiger-Ronay, Valerie
Merlini, Andrea
Wiedemeier, Daniel B.
Schmidlin, Patrick R.
Attin, Thomas
Sahrmann, Philipp
author_sort Steiger-Ronay, Valerie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: An in vitro model for peri-implantitis treatment was used to identify areas that are clinically difficult to clean by analyzing the pattern of residual stain after debridement with commonly employed instruments. METHODS: Original data from two previous publications, which simulated surgical (SA) and non-surgical (NSA) implant debridement on two different implant systems respectively, were reanalyzed regarding the localization pattern of residual stains after instrumentation. Two blinded examiners evaluated standardized photographs of 360 initially ink-stained dental implants, which were cleaned at variable defect angulations (30, 60, or 90°), using different instrument types (Gracey curette, ultrasonic scaler or air powder abrasive device) and treatment approaches (SA or NSA). Predefined implant surface areas were graded for residual stain using scores ranging from one (stain-covered) to six (clean). Score differences between respective implant areas were tested for significance by pairwise comparisons using Wilcoxon-rank-sum-tests with a significance level α = 5%. RESULTS: Best scores were found at the machined surface areas (SA: 5.58 ± 0.43, NSA: 4.76 ± 1.09), followed by the tips of the threads (SA: 4.29 ± 0.44, NSA: 4.43 ± 0.61), and areas between threads (SA: 3.79 ± 0.89, NSA: 2.42 ± 1.11). Apically facing threads were most difficult to clean (SA: 1.70 ± 0.92, NSA: 2.42 ± 1.11). Here, air powder abrasives provided the best results. CONCLUSION: Machined surfaces at the implant shoulder were well accessible and showed least amounts of residual stain. Apically facing thread surfaces constituted the area with most residual stain regardless of treatment approach.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5706147
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57061472017-12-05 Location of unaccessible implant surface areas during debridement in simulated peri-implantitis therapy Steiger-Ronay, Valerie Merlini, Andrea Wiedemeier, Daniel B. Schmidlin, Patrick R. Attin, Thomas Sahrmann, Philipp BMC Oral Health Research Article BACKGROUND: An in vitro model for peri-implantitis treatment was used to identify areas that are clinically difficult to clean by analyzing the pattern of residual stain after debridement with commonly employed instruments. METHODS: Original data from two previous publications, which simulated surgical (SA) and non-surgical (NSA) implant debridement on two different implant systems respectively, were reanalyzed regarding the localization pattern of residual stains after instrumentation. Two blinded examiners evaluated standardized photographs of 360 initially ink-stained dental implants, which were cleaned at variable defect angulations (30, 60, or 90°), using different instrument types (Gracey curette, ultrasonic scaler or air powder abrasive device) and treatment approaches (SA or NSA). Predefined implant surface areas were graded for residual stain using scores ranging from one (stain-covered) to six (clean). Score differences between respective implant areas were tested for significance by pairwise comparisons using Wilcoxon-rank-sum-tests with a significance level α = 5%. RESULTS: Best scores were found at the machined surface areas (SA: 5.58 ± 0.43, NSA: 4.76 ± 1.09), followed by the tips of the threads (SA: 4.29 ± 0.44, NSA: 4.43 ± 0.61), and areas between threads (SA: 3.79 ± 0.89, NSA: 2.42 ± 1.11). Apically facing threads were most difficult to clean (SA: 1.70 ± 0.92, NSA: 2.42 ± 1.11). Here, air powder abrasives provided the best results. CONCLUSION: Machined surfaces at the implant shoulder were well accessible and showed least amounts of residual stain. Apically facing thread surfaces constituted the area with most residual stain regardless of treatment approach. BioMed Central 2017-11-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5706147/ /pubmed/29183313 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-017-0428-8 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Steiger-Ronay, Valerie
Merlini, Andrea
Wiedemeier, Daniel B.
Schmidlin, Patrick R.
Attin, Thomas
Sahrmann, Philipp
Location of unaccessible implant surface areas during debridement in simulated peri-implantitis therapy
title Location of unaccessible implant surface areas during debridement in simulated peri-implantitis therapy
title_full Location of unaccessible implant surface areas during debridement in simulated peri-implantitis therapy
title_fullStr Location of unaccessible implant surface areas during debridement in simulated peri-implantitis therapy
title_full_unstemmed Location of unaccessible implant surface areas during debridement in simulated peri-implantitis therapy
title_short Location of unaccessible implant surface areas during debridement in simulated peri-implantitis therapy
title_sort location of unaccessible implant surface areas during debridement in simulated peri-implantitis therapy
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5706147/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29183313
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-017-0428-8
work_keys_str_mv AT steigerronayvalerie locationofunaccessibleimplantsurfaceareasduringdebridementinsimulatedperiimplantitistherapy
AT merliniandrea locationofunaccessibleimplantsurfaceareasduringdebridementinsimulatedperiimplantitistherapy
AT wiedemeierdanielb locationofunaccessibleimplantsurfaceareasduringdebridementinsimulatedperiimplantitistherapy
AT schmidlinpatrickr locationofunaccessibleimplantsurfaceareasduringdebridementinsimulatedperiimplantitistherapy
AT attinthomas locationofunaccessibleimplantsurfaceareasduringdebridementinsimulatedperiimplantitistherapy
AT sahrmannphilipp locationofunaccessibleimplantsurfaceareasduringdebridementinsimulatedperiimplantitistherapy