Cargando…

In vitro effect of different implant decontamination methods in three intraosseous defect configurations

OBJECTIVES: This in vitro investigation was aimed to evaluate the cleaning ability of four mechanical devices designed for decontaminating implant surfaces. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ninety‐six implants were coated with permanent ink and inserted into 3D‐printed resin blocks simulating three different i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Luengo, Fernando, Sanz‐Esporrín, Javier, Noguerol, Fernando, Sanz‐Martín, Ignacio, Sanz‐Sánchez, Ignacio, Sanz, Mariano
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9825956/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35997508
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13991
_version_ 1784866737522475008
author Luengo, Fernando
Sanz‐Esporrín, Javier
Noguerol, Fernando
Sanz‐Martín, Ignacio
Sanz‐Sánchez, Ignacio
Sanz, Mariano
author_facet Luengo, Fernando
Sanz‐Esporrín, Javier
Noguerol, Fernando
Sanz‐Martín, Ignacio
Sanz‐Sánchez, Ignacio
Sanz, Mariano
author_sort Luengo, Fernando
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: This in vitro investigation was aimed to evaluate the cleaning ability of four mechanical devices designed for decontaminating implant surfaces. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ninety‐six implants were coated with permanent ink and inserted into 3D‐printed resin blocks simulating three different intraosseous defect configurations (types Ib, Ic, and Ie). The four tested mechanical decontamination devices (air‐polishing with glycine powder, rotating titanium brush, polyetheretherketone [PEEK]‐coated ultrasonic tip, and stainless steel ultrasonic tip) were randomly applied onto the 5 mm exposed implant surface. Standardized photographs were taken from a frontal perspective and with a 30° angle coronally and apically to the implant axis. The area with remnant ink on the implant surface was calculated. RESULTS: Although none of the groups achieved complete ink removal, air‐polishing with glycine and titanium brushes demonstrated a higher cleaning ability when compared with ultrasonic devices either with standard or PEEK tips for all three defect configurations. For the three tested models, the best cleaning ability in all groups was shown on implant surfaces without facing an intraosseous wall. Titanium brush was the most effective when the intraosseous walls existed. Cleaning effectiveness diminished in the threads located in the apical third, especially when using air‐polishing and ultrasonic devices. CONCLUSIONS: Titanium brushes and air‐polishing devices were more effective in removing artificial biofilm using this in vitro model, although their effectiveness was influenced by the presence of the intrabony component.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9825956
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98259562023-01-09 In vitro effect of different implant decontamination methods in three intraosseous defect configurations Luengo, Fernando Sanz‐Esporrín, Javier Noguerol, Fernando Sanz‐Martín, Ignacio Sanz‐Sánchez, Ignacio Sanz, Mariano Clin Oral Implants Res Original Articles OBJECTIVES: This in vitro investigation was aimed to evaluate the cleaning ability of four mechanical devices designed for decontaminating implant surfaces. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ninety‐six implants were coated with permanent ink and inserted into 3D‐printed resin blocks simulating three different intraosseous defect configurations (types Ib, Ic, and Ie). The four tested mechanical decontamination devices (air‐polishing with glycine powder, rotating titanium brush, polyetheretherketone [PEEK]‐coated ultrasonic tip, and stainless steel ultrasonic tip) were randomly applied onto the 5 mm exposed implant surface. Standardized photographs were taken from a frontal perspective and with a 30° angle coronally and apically to the implant axis. The area with remnant ink on the implant surface was calculated. RESULTS: Although none of the groups achieved complete ink removal, air‐polishing with glycine and titanium brushes demonstrated a higher cleaning ability when compared with ultrasonic devices either with standard or PEEK tips for all three defect configurations. For the three tested models, the best cleaning ability in all groups was shown on implant surfaces without facing an intraosseous wall. Titanium brush was the most effective when the intraosseous walls existed. Cleaning effectiveness diminished in the threads located in the apical third, especially when using air‐polishing and ultrasonic devices. CONCLUSIONS: Titanium brushes and air‐polishing devices were more effective in removing artificial biofilm using this in vitro model, although their effectiveness was influenced by the presence of the intrabony component. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-09-06 2022-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9825956/ /pubmed/35997508 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13991 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Clinical Oral Implants Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Luengo, Fernando
Sanz‐Esporrín, Javier
Noguerol, Fernando
Sanz‐Martín, Ignacio
Sanz‐Sánchez, Ignacio
Sanz, Mariano
In vitro effect of different implant decontamination methods in three intraosseous defect configurations
title In vitro effect of different implant decontamination methods in three intraosseous defect configurations
title_full In vitro effect of different implant decontamination methods in three intraosseous defect configurations
title_fullStr In vitro effect of different implant decontamination methods in three intraosseous defect configurations
title_full_unstemmed In vitro effect of different implant decontamination methods in three intraosseous defect configurations
title_short In vitro effect of different implant decontamination methods in three intraosseous defect configurations
title_sort in vitro effect of different implant decontamination methods in three intraosseous defect configurations
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9825956/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35997508
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.13991
work_keys_str_mv AT luengofernando invitroeffectofdifferentimplantdecontaminationmethodsinthreeintraosseousdefectconfigurations
AT sanzesporrinjavier invitroeffectofdifferentimplantdecontaminationmethodsinthreeintraosseousdefectconfigurations
AT noguerolfernando invitroeffectofdifferentimplantdecontaminationmethodsinthreeintraosseousdefectconfigurations
AT sanzmartinignacio invitroeffectofdifferentimplantdecontaminationmethodsinthreeintraosseousdefectconfigurations
AT sanzsanchezignacio invitroeffectofdifferentimplantdecontaminationmethodsinthreeintraosseousdefectconfigurations
AT sanzmariano invitroeffectofdifferentimplantdecontaminationmethodsinthreeintraosseousdefectconfigurations