Cargando…

Antimicrobial Efficacy of Different Decontamination Methods as Tested on Dental Implants with Various Types of Surfaces

BACKGROUND: Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory reaction affecting both hard and soft tissues surrounding dental implants. This pathological condition is caused by a polymicrobial aggressive biofilm that colonizes the implant and abutment surface at the peri-implant crevice level. The present in vit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kubasiewicz-Ross, Paweł, Hadzik, Jakub, Gedrange, Tomasz, Dominiak, Marzena, Jurczyszyn, Kamil, Pitułaj, Artur, Nawrot-Hadzik, Izabela, Bortkiewicz, Olga, Fleischer, Małgorzata
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: International Scientific Literature, Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7055194/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32078588
http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/MSM.920513
_version_ 1783503324233859072
author Kubasiewicz-Ross, Paweł
Hadzik, Jakub
Gedrange, Tomasz
Dominiak, Marzena
Jurczyszyn, Kamil
Pitułaj, Artur
Nawrot-Hadzik, Izabela
Bortkiewicz, Olga
Fleischer, Małgorzata
author_facet Kubasiewicz-Ross, Paweł
Hadzik, Jakub
Gedrange, Tomasz
Dominiak, Marzena
Jurczyszyn, Kamil
Pitułaj, Artur
Nawrot-Hadzik, Izabela
Bortkiewicz, Olga
Fleischer, Małgorzata
author_sort Kubasiewicz-Ross, Paweł
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory reaction affecting both hard and soft tissues surrounding dental implants. This pathological condition is caused by a polymicrobial aggressive biofilm that colonizes the implant and abutment surface at the peri-implant crevice level. The present in vitro study evaluated different methods of implant surface decontamination and assessed whether the type of the implant surface influences the results. MATERIAL/METHODS: The study was conducted in an in vitro model of peri-implantitis using 30 implants. The implants were divided into 3 equal groups based on the surface characteristics: machined-surface, sand-blasted and acid-etched, and HA-coated. Implants were coated with E. coli biofilm. After an incubation period, they were decontaminated with 4 different methods: sonic scaler application, sonic scaler application with the chemical agent Perisolv(®) combination, Er: YAG laser treatment, and PDT therapy with methylene blue as a photosensitizer. RESULTS: The highest level of decontamination was achieved for machined-surface implants and for the combined chemical-mechanical and Er: YAG laser treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study suggest that the method of implant decontamination should be customized to the type of implant surface.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7055194
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher International Scientific Literature, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70551942020-03-16 Antimicrobial Efficacy of Different Decontamination Methods as Tested on Dental Implants with Various Types of Surfaces Kubasiewicz-Ross, Paweł Hadzik, Jakub Gedrange, Tomasz Dominiak, Marzena Jurczyszyn, Kamil Pitułaj, Artur Nawrot-Hadzik, Izabela Bortkiewicz, Olga Fleischer, Małgorzata Med Sci Monit Lab/In Vitro Research BACKGROUND: Peri-implantitis is an inflammatory reaction affecting both hard and soft tissues surrounding dental implants. This pathological condition is caused by a polymicrobial aggressive biofilm that colonizes the implant and abutment surface at the peri-implant crevice level. The present in vitro study evaluated different methods of implant surface decontamination and assessed whether the type of the implant surface influences the results. MATERIAL/METHODS: The study was conducted in an in vitro model of peri-implantitis using 30 implants. The implants were divided into 3 equal groups based on the surface characteristics: machined-surface, sand-blasted and acid-etched, and HA-coated. Implants were coated with E. coli biofilm. After an incubation period, they were decontaminated with 4 different methods: sonic scaler application, sonic scaler application with the chemical agent Perisolv(®) combination, Er: YAG laser treatment, and PDT therapy with methylene blue as a photosensitizer. RESULTS: The highest level of decontamination was achieved for machined-surface implants and for the combined chemical-mechanical and Er: YAG laser treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study suggest that the method of implant decontamination should be customized to the type of implant surface. International Scientific Literature, Inc. 2020-02-20 /pmc/articles/PMC7055194/ /pubmed/32078588 http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/MSM.920513 Text en © Med Sci Monit, 2020 This work is licensed under Creative Common Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) )
spellingShingle Lab/In Vitro Research
Kubasiewicz-Ross, Paweł
Hadzik, Jakub
Gedrange, Tomasz
Dominiak, Marzena
Jurczyszyn, Kamil
Pitułaj, Artur
Nawrot-Hadzik, Izabela
Bortkiewicz, Olga
Fleischer, Małgorzata
Antimicrobial Efficacy of Different Decontamination Methods as Tested on Dental Implants with Various Types of Surfaces
title Antimicrobial Efficacy of Different Decontamination Methods as Tested on Dental Implants with Various Types of Surfaces
title_full Antimicrobial Efficacy of Different Decontamination Methods as Tested on Dental Implants with Various Types of Surfaces
title_fullStr Antimicrobial Efficacy of Different Decontamination Methods as Tested on Dental Implants with Various Types of Surfaces
title_full_unstemmed Antimicrobial Efficacy of Different Decontamination Methods as Tested on Dental Implants with Various Types of Surfaces
title_short Antimicrobial Efficacy of Different Decontamination Methods as Tested on Dental Implants with Various Types of Surfaces
title_sort antimicrobial efficacy of different decontamination methods as tested on dental implants with various types of surfaces
topic Lab/In Vitro Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7055194/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32078588
http://dx.doi.org/10.12659/MSM.920513
work_keys_str_mv AT kubasiewiczrosspaweł antimicrobialefficacyofdifferentdecontaminationmethodsastestedondentalimplantswithvarioustypesofsurfaces
AT hadzikjakub antimicrobialefficacyofdifferentdecontaminationmethodsastestedondentalimplantswithvarioustypesofsurfaces
AT gedrangetomasz antimicrobialefficacyofdifferentdecontaminationmethodsastestedondentalimplantswithvarioustypesofsurfaces
AT dominiakmarzena antimicrobialefficacyofdifferentdecontaminationmethodsastestedondentalimplantswithvarioustypesofsurfaces
AT jurczyszynkamil antimicrobialefficacyofdifferentdecontaminationmethodsastestedondentalimplantswithvarioustypesofsurfaces
AT pitułajartur antimicrobialefficacyofdifferentdecontaminationmethodsastestedondentalimplantswithvarioustypesofsurfaces
AT nawrothadzikizabela antimicrobialefficacyofdifferentdecontaminationmethodsastestedondentalimplantswithvarioustypesofsurfaces
AT bortkiewiczolga antimicrobialefficacyofdifferentdecontaminationmethodsastestedondentalimplantswithvarioustypesofsurfaces
AT fleischermałgorzata antimicrobialefficacyofdifferentdecontaminationmethodsastestedondentalimplantswithvarioustypesofsurfaces