The use of a linear oscillating device in periodontal treatment: a review

Assessment of implant surface and instrument insert changes due to instrumentation with different tips for ultrasonic-driven debridement

Background

To assess the changes of implant surfaces of different roughness after instrumentation with ultrasonic-driven scaler tips of different materials.

Methods

Experiments were performed on two moderately rough surfaces (I—Inicell® and II—SLA®), one surface without pre-treatment (III) and one smooth machined surface (IV). Scaler tips made of steel (A), PEEK (B), titanium (C), carbon (D) and resin (E) were used for instrumentation with a standardized pressure of 100 g for ten seconds and under continuous automatic motion. Each combination of scaler tip and implant surface was performed three times on 8 titanium discs. After instrumentation roughness was assessed by profilometry, morphological changes were assessed by scanning electron microscopy, and element distribution on the utmost surface by energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy.

Results

The surface roughness of discs I and II were significantly reduced by instrumentation with all tips except E. For disc III and IV roughness was enhanced by tip A and C and, only for IV, by tip D. Instrumentation with tips B, D and E left extensive residuals on surface I, II and III. The element analysis of these deposits proved consistent with the elemental composition of the respective tip materials.

Conclusion

All ultrasonic instruments led to microscopic alterations of all types of implants surfaces assessed in the present study. The least change of implant surfaces might result from resin or carbon tips on machined surfaces.

Nonsurgical and surgical treatment of periodontitis: how many options for one disease?

Treatment of periodontitis aims at preventing further disease progression with the intentions to reduce the risk of tooth loss, minimize symptoms and perception of the disease, possibly restore lost periodontal tissue and provide information on maintaining a healthy periodontium. Therapeutic intervention includes introduction of techniques to change behavior, such as: individually tailored oral-hygiene instructions; a smoking-cessation program; dietary adjustment; subgingival instrumentation to remove plaque and calculus; local and systemic pharmacotherapy; and various types of surgery. No single treatment option has shown superiority, and virtually all types of mechanical periodontal treatment benefit from adjunctive antimicrobial chemotherapy. Periodontal treatment, because of the chronic nature of periodontitis, is a lifelong commitment to intricate oral-hygiene techniques, which, when properly implemented, will minimize the risk of disease initiation and progression.

Histological and profilometric evaluation of the root surface after instrumentation with a new piezoelectric device - ex vivo study

OBJECTIVES

An ex vivo model was designed to profilometrically and histologically assess root changes resulting from scaling with a new ultrasonic device, designed for bone piezoelectric surgery, in comparison with curettes.

METHODS

Three groups of 10 periodontal hopeless teeth were each subjected to different root instrumentation: Gracey curettes (CUR); ultrasonic piezoelectric device, Perio 100% setting, level 8 (P100); and ultrasonic piezoelectric device Surg 50% setting, level 1 (S50). After extraction, all teeth were photographed to visually assess the presence of dental calculus. The treated root surfaces were profilometrically evaluated (Ra, Rz, Rmax). Undecalcified histological sections were prepared to assess qualitative changes in cementum thickness. Statistical analysis was carried out using one-way anova test with a significance level of 95%.

RESULTS

Both instruments proved to be effective in the complete removal of calculus. The CUR group presented the lowest Ra [2.28 μm (±0.58)] and S50 the highest [3.01 μm (±0.61)]. No statistically significant differences were detected among the three groups, for Ra, Rz and Rmax. Histologically, there was a cementum thickness reduction in all groups, being higher and more irregular in S50 group.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of this study, there were no statistically significant differences in roughness parameters analyzed between curettes and the ultrasonic piezoelectric unit. This new instrument removes a smaller amount of cementum, mainly at the Perio 100% power setting, which appears to be the least damaging. The ultrasonic device is effective in calculus removal, proving to be as effective as curettes.

Minimally-invasive non-surgical periodontal therapy

Periodontitis is a complex disease that has both oral and systemic consequences. The treatment of periodontitis may be both surgical and non-surgical but, in recent years, there has been a shift towards managing disease non-surgically in preference to surgery. Fundamental to all types of therapy is the patient's role in disease control, in the form of self-performed plaque control, and it is important that the patient understands this. Non-surgical periodontal therapy has a long history and has traditionally been carried out using a variety of hand and powered instruments, the objective being root surface disinfection by the removal of plaque, calculus and contaminated root cementum. However, over the last 30 years or so, it has become apparent that calculus does not cause disease, cementum does not become significantly infected and bacteria and their toxins are only loosely adherent to the diseased root surface. This has led to the development of less invasive instrumentation principles which may be better for patients, more cost-effective and more easily applied in different clinical settings.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This paper aims to describe and justify a minimally-invasive approach to the management of the diseased root surface in periodontitis, to clarify the terminology used and to suggest how these principles may be applied in general practice.

Subjective intensity of pain during supportive periodontal treatment using a sonic scaler or an Er:YAG laser

OBJECTIVE

To assess the subjective intensities of pain during supportive periodontal treatment using a sonic scaler or an Er:YAG laser.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Forty patients with two residual periodontal pockets following conventional periodontal therapy were treated using a sonic scaler and an Er:YAG laser in a split-mouth design. A visual analogue scale was used for pain assessment directly after each treatment procedure. Additionally, pain was recorded during the treatment of 11 patients at intervals of 0.5 s using an inter-modal intensity comparison.

RESULTS

Pain assessment during treatment showed that laser treatment (median pain score: 0.71 U, maximum: 9.94 U, minimum: 0 U) caused less pain than the sonic device (median pain score: 2.17 U, maximum: 11.26 U, minimum: 0 U) (p<0.05) with no difference in the treatment time (p>0.05). These results could be confirmed by the visual analogue scale: pain scores assessed after laser treatment (median: 1 U, maximum: 7 U, minimum: 0 U) were lower than those after sonic instrumentation (median: 3.5 U, maximum: 7.5 U, minimum: 0 U) (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Using an Er:YAG laser during supportive periodontal treatment, painful sensations can be reduced compared with sonic scaler instrumentation.

Effectiveness of 980-mm diode and 1064-nm extra-long-pulse neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet lasers in implant disinfection

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the potential of 980-nm gallium aluminum arsenide (GaAlAs) and 1064-nm neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Nd:YAG) lasers to reduce bacteria after irradiation of implant surfaces contaminated with Enterococcus faecalis and Porphyromonas gingivalis and on irradiated implant surface morphology.

BACKGROUND

Despite the frequency of implant success, some implant loss is related to peri-implantitis because of difficulty in eliminating the biofilm.

METHODS

Implants (3.75 x 13 mm) with machined surfaces, surfaces sand blasted with titanium oxide (TiO(2)), and sand-blasted and acid-etched surfaces were exposed to P. gingivalis and E. faecalis cultures and irradiated with 980-nm GaAlAs or 1064-nm Nd:YAG lasers. After laser treatments, the number of remaining colony-forming units and implant surface morphology were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM).

RESULTS

The Nd:YAG laser was able to promote a total contamination reduction on all implants irradiated. The results with the GaAlAs laser showed 100% bacteria reduction on the implants irradiated with 3 W. Irradiation with 2.5 W and 3 W achieved 100% of bacteria reduction on P. gingivalis-contaminated implants. Decontamination was not complete for the sand-blasted TiO(2) (78.6%) and acid-etched surfaces (49.4%) contaminated with E. faecalis and irradiated with 2.5 W. SEM showed no implant surface changes.

CONCLUSION

The wavelengths used in this research provided bacteria reduction without damaging implant surfaces. New clinical research should be encouraged for the use of this technology in the treatment of peri-implantitis.