Cleaning Effectiveness of Implant Prophylaxis Instruments

被引:40
|
作者
Schmage, Petra [1 ]
Kahili, Fisnik [2 ]
Nergiz, Ibrahim [1 ]
Scorziello, Thomas M. [3 ]
Platzer, Ursula [1 ]
Pfeiffer, Peter [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hamburg, Sch Dent & Oral Med, Dept Restorat & Prevent Dent, Hamburg, Germany
[2] Dent Clin, Oldenburg, Germany
[3] Univ Med & Dent New Jersey, New Jersey Dent Sch, Dept Periodont, Newark, NJ 07103 USA
[4] Univ Cologne, Sch Oral Med, Dept Prosthet Dent, D-50931 Cologne, Germany
关键词
air polishing; implant cleaning; implant scaler; implant supportive therapy; implant surfaces; prophylaxis instruments; PERI-IMPLANTITIS; IN-VITRO; TITANIUM SURFACES; DENTAL IMPLANTS; BACTERIAL ADHESION; GLYCINE POWDER; ORAL IMPLANTS; THERAPY; ABUTMENTS; DECONTAMINATION;
D O I
10.11607/jomi.2524
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cleaning effectiveness of implant prophylaxis instruments on polished and acid-etched implant surfaces. Materials and Methods: Biofilm layers of Streptococcus mutans were grown on a total of 80 titanium disks; 40 disks were polished and 40 were acid-etched. Five disks of each surface were cleaned using each of seven implant prophylaxis instruments: (1) manual plastic curette, (2) manual carbon fiber-reinforced plastic (CFRP) curette, (3) sonic-driven prophylaxis brush, (4) rotating rubber cup with prophylaxis paste, (5) sonic-driven polyether ether ketone (PEEK) plastic tip, (6) ultrasonic-driven PEEK plastic tip, and (7) air polishing with amino acid (glycine) powder. Ten disks (five of each surface type) served as controls. After cleaning, the surfaces with remaining bacteria were assessed by light microscopy. Statistical analyses of the results were performed with one-way and two-way analyses of variance with Bonferroni-Dunn multiple comparisons post hoc analysis (alpha = .05). Results: The cleaning effectiveness of the plastic curette was significantly lower than those of all machine-driven instruments on the polished surface. Significantly lower cleaning effectiveness occurred with the CFRP curette compared to the prophylaxis brush and to both oscillating PEEK plastic tips on the polished surface. The rubber cup provided less cleaning effectiveness compared to the ultrasonic PEEK plastic tip and air polishing on the acid-etched surface. Superior results, with less than 4% of the biofilm remaining, were obtained for both oscillating PEEK plastic tips and air polishing on both implant surfaces. The cleaning ability of the prophylaxis brush, rubber cup, and ultrasonic PEEK plastic tip differed significantly between both surface structures. Conclusions: Cleaning effectiveness, ie, less than 4% of the biofilm remaining, was not observed with all tested implant prophylaxis instruments. The cleaning ability of the devices depended on the implant surface structure.
引用
收藏
页码:331 / 337
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] EFFECTIVENESS OF ULTRASONIC CLEANING OF DENTAL INSTRUMENTS
    CAFRUNY, WA
    BRUNICK, A
    NELSON, DM
    NELSON, RF
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 1995, 8 (03): : 152 - 156
  • [2] An in vitro and in vivo evaluation various implant cleaning instruments
    Bain, CA
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 1996, 75 (05) : 1168 - 1168
  • [3] Effects of 10 Cleaning Instruments on Four Different Implant Surfaces
    Schmage, Petra
    Thielemann, Julia
    Nergiz, Ibrahim
    Scorziello, Thomas M.
    Pfeiffer, Peter
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS, 2012, 27 (02) : 308 - 317
  • [4] An in vitro and in vivo evaluation of various implant-cleaning instruments
    Bain, CA
    QUINTESSENCE INTERNATIONAL, 1998, 29 (07): : 423 - 427
  • [5] Cleaning dental instruments: Measuring the effectiveness of an instrument washer/disinfector
    Miller, CH
    Tan, CM
    Beiswanger, MA
    Gaines, DJ
    Setcos, JC
    Palenik, CJ
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2000, 13 (01): : 39 - 43
  • [6] Cleaning Effectiveness of Three NiTi Rotary Instruments: A Focus on Biomaterial Properties
    Poggio, Claudio
    Dagna, Alberto
    Chiesa, Marco
    Beltrami, Riccardo
    Bianchi, Stefano
    JOURNAL OF FUNCTIONAL BIOMATERIALS, 2015, 6 (01): : 66 - 76
  • [7] The effectiveness of thermal disinfector vs. ultrasonic cleaning of endodontic instruments.
    Weerakoon, A
    Meyers, IA
    Walsh, LJ
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 2003, 82 : 103 - 103
  • [8] Complex design of surgical instruments as barrier for cleaning effectiveness, favouring biofilm formation
    Lopes, L. K. O.
    Costa, D. M.
    Tipple, A. F., V
    Watanabe, E.
    Castillo, R. B.
    Hu, H.
    Deva, A. K.
    Vickery, K.
    JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL INFECTION, 2019, 103 (01) : E53 - E60
  • [9] CLEANING OF INSTRUMENTS AND SYRINGES
    DARMADY, EM
    HUGHES, KEA
    DREWETT, SE
    PRINCE, D
    TUKE, W
    VERDON, P
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY, 1965, 18 (01) : 6 - &
  • [10] INSTRUMENTS FOR RECORD CLEANING
    WILSON, P
    JOURNAL OF THE AUDIO ENGINEERING SOCIETY, 1966, 14 (01): : 76 - &