Cargando…

Laser Cleaning Improves Stem Cell Adhesion on the Dental Implant Surface during Peri-Implantitis Treatment

Dental implant therapy is a well-accepted treatment modality. Despite good predictability and success in the early stages, the risk of postplacement inflammation in the long-term periods remains an urgent problem. Surgical access and decontamination with chemical and mechanical methods are more effe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Furtsev, Taras V., Koshmanova, Anastasia A., Zeer, Galina M., Nikolaeva, Elena D., Lapin, Ivan N., Zamay, Tatiana N., Kichkailo, Anna S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9956030/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36826175
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/dj11020030
_version_ 1784894492559540224
author Furtsev, Taras V.
Koshmanova, Anastasia A.
Zeer, Galina M.
Nikolaeva, Elena D.
Lapin, Ivan N.
Zamay, Tatiana N.
Kichkailo, Anna S.
author_facet Furtsev, Taras V.
Koshmanova, Anastasia A.
Zeer, Galina M.
Nikolaeva, Elena D.
Lapin, Ivan N.
Zamay, Tatiana N.
Kichkailo, Anna S.
author_sort Furtsev, Taras V.
collection PubMed
description Dental implant therapy is a well-accepted treatment modality. Despite good predictability and success in the early stages, the risk of postplacement inflammation in the long-term periods remains an urgent problem. Surgical access and decontamination with chemical and mechanical methods are more effective than antibiotic therapy. The search for the optimal and predictable way for peri-implantitis treatment remains relevant. Here, we evaluated four cleaning methods for their ability to preserve the implant’s surface for adequate mesenchymal stem cell adhesion and differentiation. Implants isolated after peri-implantitis were subjected to cleaning with diamond bur; Ti-Ni alloy brush, air-flow, or Er,Cr:YSGG laser and cocultured with mice MSC for five weeks. Dental bur and titanium brushes destroyed the implants’ surfaces and prevented MSC attachment. Air-flow and laser minimally affected the dental implant surface microroughness, which was initially designed for good cell adhesion and bone remodeling and to provide full microbial decontamination. Anodized with titanium dioxide and sandblasted with aluminum oxide, acid-etched implants appeared to be better for laser treatment. In implants sandblasted with aluminum oxide, an acid-etched surface better preserves its topology when treated with the air-flow. These cleaning methods minimally affect the implant’s surface, so it maintains the capability to absorb osteogenic cells for further division and differentiation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9956030
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99560302023-02-25 Laser Cleaning Improves Stem Cell Adhesion on the Dental Implant Surface during Peri-Implantitis Treatment Furtsev, Taras V. Koshmanova, Anastasia A. Zeer, Galina M. Nikolaeva, Elena D. Lapin, Ivan N. Zamay, Tatiana N. Kichkailo, Anna S. Dent J (Basel) Article Dental implant therapy is a well-accepted treatment modality. Despite good predictability and success in the early stages, the risk of postplacement inflammation in the long-term periods remains an urgent problem. Surgical access and decontamination with chemical and mechanical methods are more effective than antibiotic therapy. The search for the optimal and predictable way for peri-implantitis treatment remains relevant. Here, we evaluated four cleaning methods for their ability to preserve the implant’s surface for adequate mesenchymal stem cell adhesion and differentiation. Implants isolated after peri-implantitis were subjected to cleaning with diamond bur; Ti-Ni alloy brush, air-flow, or Er,Cr:YSGG laser and cocultured with mice MSC for five weeks. Dental bur and titanium brushes destroyed the implants’ surfaces and prevented MSC attachment. Air-flow and laser minimally affected the dental implant surface microroughness, which was initially designed for good cell adhesion and bone remodeling and to provide full microbial decontamination. Anodized with titanium dioxide and sandblasted with aluminum oxide, acid-etched implants appeared to be better for laser treatment. In implants sandblasted with aluminum oxide, an acid-etched surface better preserves its topology when treated with the air-flow. These cleaning methods minimally affect the implant’s surface, so it maintains the capability to absorb osteogenic cells for further division and differentiation. MDPI 2023-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9956030/ /pubmed/36826175 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/dj11020030 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Furtsev, Taras V.
Koshmanova, Anastasia A.
Zeer, Galina M.
Nikolaeva, Elena D.
Lapin, Ivan N.
Zamay, Tatiana N.
Kichkailo, Anna S.
Laser Cleaning Improves Stem Cell Adhesion on the Dental Implant Surface during Peri-Implantitis Treatment
title Laser Cleaning Improves Stem Cell Adhesion on the Dental Implant Surface during Peri-Implantitis Treatment
title_full Laser Cleaning Improves Stem Cell Adhesion on the Dental Implant Surface during Peri-Implantitis Treatment
title_fullStr Laser Cleaning Improves Stem Cell Adhesion on the Dental Implant Surface during Peri-Implantitis Treatment
title_full_unstemmed Laser Cleaning Improves Stem Cell Adhesion on the Dental Implant Surface during Peri-Implantitis Treatment
title_short Laser Cleaning Improves Stem Cell Adhesion on the Dental Implant Surface during Peri-Implantitis Treatment
title_sort laser cleaning improves stem cell adhesion on the dental implant surface during peri-implantitis treatment
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9956030/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36826175
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/dj11020030
work_keys_str_mv AT furtsevtarasv lasercleaningimprovesstemcelladhesiononthedentalimplantsurfaceduringperiimplantitistreatment
AT koshmanovaanastasiaa lasercleaningimprovesstemcelladhesiononthedentalimplantsurfaceduringperiimplantitistreatment
AT zeergalinam lasercleaningimprovesstemcelladhesiononthedentalimplantsurfaceduringperiimplantitistreatment
AT nikolaevaelenad lasercleaningimprovesstemcelladhesiononthedentalimplantsurfaceduringperiimplantitistreatment
AT lapinivann lasercleaningimprovesstemcelladhesiononthedentalimplantsurfaceduringperiimplantitistreatment
AT zamaytatianan lasercleaningimprovesstemcelladhesiononthedentalimplantsurfaceduringperiimplantitistreatment
AT kichkailoannas lasercleaningimprovesstemcelladhesiononthedentalimplantsurfaceduringperiimplantitistreatment