Cargando…

Simulated damage of two implant debridement methods: Nonsurgical approach with Teflon and stainless steel hand scalers

BACKGROUND: Mechanical scaling is the most common treatment of periodontal and peri-implant tissue infections. AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of mechanical prophylactic therapy on the residual stresses in the implant and hand scaler. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: For finite-element analysis, a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tribst, João Paulo Mendes, Dal Piva, Amanda Maria de Oliveira, de Lima, Dimas Renno, Borges, Alexandre Luiz Souto, Bottino, Marco Antonio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6077965/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30131627
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jisp.jisp_201_18
_version_ 1783345010958139392
author Tribst, João Paulo Mendes
Dal Piva, Amanda Maria de Oliveira
de Lima, Dimas Renno
Borges, Alexandre Luiz Souto
Bottino, Marco Antonio
author_facet Tribst, João Paulo Mendes
Dal Piva, Amanda Maria de Oliveira
de Lima, Dimas Renno
Borges, Alexandre Luiz Souto
Bottino, Marco Antonio
author_sort Tribst, João Paulo Mendes
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Mechanical scaling is the most common treatment of periodontal and peri-implant tissue infections. AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of mechanical prophylactic therapy on the residual stresses in the implant and hand scaler. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: For finite-element analysis, an implant-supported prosthesis was created using modeling software with 3 mm of exposed threads. For simulation of a prophylactic mechanical debridement, the active face of the shank was disposed of in contact with the last thread exposed at a 90° angle. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the analysis software, the contacts were defined as rough between the instrument and the implant. The cortical bone was fixed and a load of 10 N was applied to the instrument cable. Two simulations were performed according to the instrument material: stainless steel or Teflon. Von-Mises results were obtained. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: No statistical test was used, but, the 500 higher stress peaks in the implant and in the instrument were analyzed for qualitative comparison. RESULTS: Mechanical prophylactic therapy generates higher residual stress on the implant with a stainless steel instrument. There was no difference between the materials for the active tip of the instrument, and the active portion of the shank was the region which concentrated more stress. CONCLUSIONS: It is suggested that hand scalers in Teflon are less damaging to the implant, but more susceptible to deformation and possible early failures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6077965
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60779652018-08-21 Simulated damage of two implant debridement methods: Nonsurgical approach with Teflon and stainless steel hand scalers Tribst, João Paulo Mendes Dal Piva, Amanda Maria de Oliveira de Lima, Dimas Renno Borges, Alexandre Luiz Souto Bottino, Marco Antonio J Indian Soc Periodontol Original Article BACKGROUND: Mechanical scaling is the most common treatment of periodontal and peri-implant tissue infections. AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of mechanical prophylactic therapy on the residual stresses in the implant and hand scaler. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: For finite-element analysis, an implant-supported prosthesis was created using modeling software with 3 mm of exposed threads. For simulation of a prophylactic mechanical debridement, the active face of the shank was disposed of in contact with the last thread exposed at a 90° angle. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the analysis software, the contacts were defined as rough between the instrument and the implant. The cortical bone was fixed and a load of 10 N was applied to the instrument cable. Two simulations were performed according to the instrument material: stainless steel or Teflon. Von-Mises results were obtained. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: No statistical test was used, but, the 500 higher stress peaks in the implant and in the instrument were analyzed for qualitative comparison. RESULTS: Mechanical prophylactic therapy generates higher residual stress on the implant with a stainless steel instrument. There was no difference between the materials for the active tip of the instrument, and the active portion of the shank was the region which concentrated more stress. CONCLUSIONS: It is suggested that hand scalers in Teflon are less damaging to the implant, but more susceptible to deformation and possible early failures. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6077965/ /pubmed/30131627 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jisp.jisp_201_18 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Journal of Indian Society of Periodontology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Tribst, João Paulo Mendes
Dal Piva, Amanda Maria de Oliveira
de Lima, Dimas Renno
Borges, Alexandre Luiz Souto
Bottino, Marco Antonio
Simulated damage of two implant debridement methods: Nonsurgical approach with Teflon and stainless steel hand scalers
title Simulated damage of two implant debridement methods: Nonsurgical approach with Teflon and stainless steel hand scalers
title_full Simulated damage of two implant debridement methods: Nonsurgical approach with Teflon and stainless steel hand scalers
title_fullStr Simulated damage of two implant debridement methods: Nonsurgical approach with Teflon and stainless steel hand scalers
title_full_unstemmed Simulated damage of two implant debridement methods: Nonsurgical approach with Teflon and stainless steel hand scalers
title_short Simulated damage of two implant debridement methods: Nonsurgical approach with Teflon and stainless steel hand scalers
title_sort simulated damage of two implant debridement methods: nonsurgical approach with teflon and stainless steel hand scalers
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6077965/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30131627
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jisp.jisp_201_18
work_keys_str_mv AT tribstjoaopaulomendes simulateddamageoftwoimplantdebridementmethodsnonsurgicalapproachwithteflonandstainlesssteelhandscalers
AT dalpivaamandamariadeoliveira simulateddamageoftwoimplantdebridementmethodsnonsurgicalapproachwithteflonandstainlesssteelhandscalers
AT delimadimasrenno simulateddamageoftwoimplantdebridementmethodsnonsurgicalapproachwithteflonandstainlesssteelhandscalers
AT borgesalexandreluizsouto simulateddamageoftwoimplantdebridementmethodsnonsurgicalapproachwithteflonandstainlesssteelhandscalers
AT bottinomarcoantonio simulateddamageoftwoimplantdebridementmethodsnonsurgicalapproachwithteflonandstainlesssteelhandscalers