Cargando…
Comparison of the effects of air-powder abrasion, chemical decontamination, or their combination in open-flap surface decontamination of implants failed for peri-implantitis: an ex vivo study
OBJECTIVES: To compare, using an ex vivo model, the biofilm removal of three surface decontamination methods following surgical exposure of implants failed for severe peri-implantitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study design was a single-blind, randomized, controlled, ex vivo investigation with intr...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8060238/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32975703 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03578-w |
_version_ | 1783681319544291328 |
---|---|
author | Pranno, Nicola Cristalli, Maria Paola Mengoni, Fabio Sauzullo, Ilaria Annibali, Susanna Polimeni, Antonella La Monaca, Gerardo |
author_facet | Pranno, Nicola Cristalli, Maria Paola Mengoni, Fabio Sauzullo, Ilaria Annibali, Susanna Polimeni, Antonella La Monaca, Gerardo |
author_sort | Pranno, Nicola |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To compare, using an ex vivo model, the biofilm removal of three surface decontamination methods following surgical exposure of implants failed for severe peri-implantitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study design was a single-blind, randomized, controlled, ex vivo investigation with intra-subject control. Study participants were 20 consecutive patients with at least 4 hopeless implants, in function for >12 months and with progressive bone loss exceeding 50%, which had to be explanted. Implants of each patient were randomly assigned to the untreated control group or one of the three decontamination procedures: mechanical debridement with air-powder abrasion, chemical decontamination with hydrogen peroxide and chlorhexidine gluconate, or combined mechanical-chemical decontamination. Following surgical exposure, implants selected as control were retrieved, and afterwards, test implants were decontaminated according to allocation and carefully explanted with a removal kit. Microbiological analysis was expressed in colony-forming-units (CFU/ml). RESULTS: A statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) in the concentrations of CFU/ml was found between implants treated with mechanical debridement (531.58 ± 372.07) or combined mechanical-chemical decontamination (954.05 ± 2219.31) and implants untreated (37,800.00 ± 46,837.05) or treated with chemical decontamination alone (29,650.00 ± 42,596.20). No statistically significant difference (p = 1.000) was found between mechanical debridement used alone or supplemented with chemical decontamination. Microbiological analyses identified 21 microbial species, without significant differences between control and treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Bacterial biofilm removal from infected implant surfaces was significantly superior for mechanical debridement than chemical decontamination. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The present is the only ex vivo study based on decontamination methods for removing actual and mature biofilm from infected implant surfaces in patients with peri-implantitis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8060238 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80602382021-05-05 Comparison of the effects of air-powder abrasion, chemical decontamination, or their combination in open-flap surface decontamination of implants failed for peri-implantitis: an ex vivo study Pranno, Nicola Cristalli, Maria Paola Mengoni, Fabio Sauzullo, Ilaria Annibali, Susanna Polimeni, Antonella La Monaca, Gerardo Clin Oral Investig Original Article OBJECTIVES: To compare, using an ex vivo model, the biofilm removal of three surface decontamination methods following surgical exposure of implants failed for severe peri-implantitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study design was a single-blind, randomized, controlled, ex vivo investigation with intra-subject control. Study participants were 20 consecutive patients with at least 4 hopeless implants, in function for >12 months and with progressive bone loss exceeding 50%, which had to be explanted. Implants of each patient were randomly assigned to the untreated control group or one of the three decontamination procedures: mechanical debridement with air-powder abrasion, chemical decontamination with hydrogen peroxide and chlorhexidine gluconate, or combined mechanical-chemical decontamination. Following surgical exposure, implants selected as control were retrieved, and afterwards, test implants were decontaminated according to allocation and carefully explanted with a removal kit. Microbiological analysis was expressed in colony-forming-units (CFU/ml). RESULTS: A statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) in the concentrations of CFU/ml was found between implants treated with mechanical debridement (531.58 ± 372.07) or combined mechanical-chemical decontamination (954.05 ± 2219.31) and implants untreated (37,800.00 ± 46,837.05) or treated with chemical decontamination alone (29,650.00 ± 42,596.20). No statistically significant difference (p = 1.000) was found between mechanical debridement used alone or supplemented with chemical decontamination. Microbiological analyses identified 21 microbial species, without significant differences between control and treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Bacterial biofilm removal from infected implant surfaces was significantly superior for mechanical debridement than chemical decontamination. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The present is the only ex vivo study based on decontamination methods for removing actual and mature biofilm from infected implant surfaces in patients with peri-implantitis. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-09-25 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8060238/ /pubmed/32975703 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03578-w Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Pranno, Nicola Cristalli, Maria Paola Mengoni, Fabio Sauzullo, Ilaria Annibali, Susanna Polimeni, Antonella La Monaca, Gerardo Comparison of the effects of air-powder abrasion, chemical decontamination, or their combination in open-flap surface decontamination of implants failed for peri-implantitis: an ex vivo study |
title | Comparison of the effects of air-powder abrasion, chemical decontamination, or their combination in open-flap surface decontamination of implants failed for peri-implantitis: an ex vivo study |
title_full | Comparison of the effects of air-powder abrasion, chemical decontamination, or their combination in open-flap surface decontamination of implants failed for peri-implantitis: an ex vivo study |
title_fullStr | Comparison of the effects of air-powder abrasion, chemical decontamination, or their combination in open-flap surface decontamination of implants failed for peri-implantitis: an ex vivo study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of the effects of air-powder abrasion, chemical decontamination, or their combination in open-flap surface decontamination of implants failed for peri-implantitis: an ex vivo study |
title_short | Comparison of the effects of air-powder abrasion, chemical decontamination, or their combination in open-flap surface decontamination of implants failed for peri-implantitis: an ex vivo study |
title_sort | comparison of the effects of air-powder abrasion, chemical decontamination, or their combination in open-flap surface decontamination of implants failed for peri-implantitis: an ex vivo study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8060238/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32975703 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03578-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT prannonicola comparisonoftheeffectsofairpowderabrasionchemicaldecontaminationortheircombinationinopenflapsurfacedecontaminationofimplantsfailedforperiimplantitisanexvivostudy AT cristallimariapaola comparisonoftheeffectsofairpowderabrasionchemicaldecontaminationortheircombinationinopenflapsurfacedecontaminationofimplantsfailedforperiimplantitisanexvivostudy AT mengonifabio comparisonoftheeffectsofairpowderabrasionchemicaldecontaminationortheircombinationinopenflapsurfacedecontaminationofimplantsfailedforperiimplantitisanexvivostudy AT sauzulloilaria comparisonoftheeffectsofairpowderabrasionchemicaldecontaminationortheircombinationinopenflapsurfacedecontaminationofimplantsfailedforperiimplantitisanexvivostudy AT annibalisusanna comparisonoftheeffectsofairpowderabrasionchemicaldecontaminationortheircombinationinopenflapsurfacedecontaminationofimplantsfailedforperiimplantitisanexvivostudy AT polimeniantonella comparisonoftheeffectsofairpowderabrasionchemicaldecontaminationortheircombinationinopenflapsurfacedecontaminationofimplantsfailedforperiimplantitisanexvivostudy AT lamonacagerardo comparisonoftheeffectsofairpowderabrasionchemicaldecontaminationortheircombinationinopenflapsurfacedecontaminationofimplantsfailedforperiimplantitisanexvivostudy |