Recommendations on the clinical application of air polishing for the management of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis

In-vitro biofilm removal from TiUnite® implant surface with an air polishing and two different plasma devices

BACKGROUND

We investigated the efficacy of two different cold atmospheric pressure jet plasma devices (CAP09 and CAPmed) and an air polishing device with glycine powder (AP) either applied as monotherapies or combined therapies (AP + CAP09; AP + CAPmed), in microbial biofilm removal from discs with anodised titanium surface.

METHODS

Discs covered with 7-day-old microbial biofilm were treated either with CAP09, CAPmed, AP, AP + CAP09 or AP + CAPmed and compared with negative and positive controls. Biofilm removal was assessed with flourescence and electron microscopy immediately after treatment and after 5 days of reincubation of the treated discs.

RESULTS

Treatment with CAP09 or CAPmed did not lead to an effective biofilm removal, whereas treatment with AP detached the complete biofilm, which however regrew to baseline magnitude after 5 days of reincubation. Both combination therapies (AP + CAP09 and AP + CAPmed) achieved a complete biofilm removal immediately after cleaning. However, biofilm regrew after 5 days on 50% of the discs treated with the combination therapy.

CONCLUSION

AP treatment alone can remove gross biofilm immediately from anodised titanium surfaces. However, it did not impede regrowth after 5 days, because microorganisms were probably hidden in holes and troughs, from which they could regrow, and which were inaccessible to AP. The combination of AP and plasma treatment probably removed or inactivated microorganisms also from these hard to access spots. These results were independent of the choice of plasma device.

Effect of Er,Cr:YSGG laser with a side-firing tip on decontamination of titanium disc surface: an in vitro and in vivo study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness of an erbium, chromium:yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet (Er,Cr:YSGG) laser with side-firing tip in decontamination of titanium (Ti) disc.

METHODS

In the first test series, 29 Ti-discs were contaminated with Staphylococcus aureus and treated as follows: positive control (no treatment); Perioflow; Laser A (0.75 W, 100 Hz), Laser B (1.5 W, 30 Hz); Laser C (no radiation, 60% water); and Laser D (no radiation, 50% water). For bacterial quantification, colony forming units (CFU, vital cells only) and quantitative PCR (qPCR, vital and devital cells) were performed. In a second test series, 92 Ti-discs were used, contaminated with in vivo-grown biofilm and treated as follows: positive control (no treatment); Perioflow; Laser E (1.5 W, 30 Hz), and Laser F (no radiation, 50% water). Considering the different and unknown culture conditions, quantification of bacteria was performed by broad-spectrum bacterial qPCR only. Based on the assumption that all cells of an organism contain an equivalent complement of genetic information, genome equivalent (GE) determination ensured the detection of the different intact and semi-intact genomes, regardless of type of bacterial species and vitality, circumvent the inherent bias of cultures.

RESULTS

The GE values were significantly reduced by all interventions in both test series, compared to the positive control group (p < 0.001). In the first test series with S. aureus as model organism, Perioflow yielded a lower GE than the Laser groups A-D (all p < 0.025). The number of CFUs was significantly reduced in the intervention groups compared to the positive control (p < 0.001), except for Laser A (p = 0.157) and Laser D (p = 0.393). In the second test series, none of the pairwise comparisons of the intervention conditions showed a significant difference (Perioflow vs. Laser E: p = 0.732; Perioflow vs. Laser F: p = 0.590; Laser E vs. Laser F: p = 0.379).

CONCLUSION

The Er,Cr:YSGG laser with side-firing tip and Perioflow were equally capable of effectively decontaminating a Ti-disc surface. It is assumed that the bacterial reduction was largely due to the mechanical effect of the air and water stream.

Influence of eight debridement techniques on three different titanium surfaces: A laboratory study

OBJECTIVES

Debridement methods may damage implant surfaces. This in vitro study investigated eight debridement protocols across three implant surfaces to assess both biofilm removal and surface alterations.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

One hundred sixty commercially pure titanium discs were treated to simulate commercially available titanium implant surfaces-smooth, abraded and abraded and etched. Following inoculation with whole human saliva to create a mixed species biofilm, the surfaces were treated with eight debridement methods currently used for clinical peri-implantitis (n = 10). This included air abrasion using powders of glycine, sodium bicarbonate and calcium carbonate; conventional mechanical methods-piezoelectric scaler, carbon and stainless steel scalers; and a chemical protocol using 40% citric acid. Following treatment, remaining biofilm was analysed using scanning electron microscopy and crystal violet assays. For statistical analysis, ANOVA was applied (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

All debridement techniques resulted in greater than 80% reduction in biofilm compared with baseline, irrespective of the surface type. Glycine powder delivered through an air polishing system eliminated the most biofilm. Mechanical instruments were the least effective at eliminating biofilm across all surfaces and caused the greatest surface alterations. Citric acid was comparable with mechanical debridement instruments in terms of biofilm removal efficacy. Titanium surfaces were least affected by air abrasion protocols and most affected by mechanical methods.

CONCLUSIONS

Mechanical protocols for non-surgical debridement should be approached with caution. Glycine powder in an air polisher and 40% citric acid application both gave minimal alterations across all implant surfaces, with glycine the superior method in terms of biofilm removal.

Microbiological and clinical evaluation of ultrasonic debridement with/without erythritol air polishing during supportive periodontal therapy in arches with full-arch fixed implant-supported prostheses: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Implant-supported prostheses are often successfully used in edentulous patients. However, the incidences of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis increase over time. The accumulation of pathogenic bacteria adjacent to prostheses can induce peri-implant disease. Plaque removal is recommended to prevent and manage peri-implant diseases. The purpose of this study is to compare the plaque removal efficacy of ultrasonic debridement with/without erythritol air-polishing powder around implants and bridges in patients with full-arch fixed implant-supported prostheses as well as the effects of these two methods on the rates of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis, and the submucosal microbiota composition over 5 years in patients undergoing supportive periodontal therapy.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We plan to enrol 10 edentulous (maxilla and/or mandible) patients seeking full-arch fixed implant-supported prostheses. The study will use a split-mouth model in which contralateral quadrants are randomly assigned to two groups. Group 1: one contralateral quadrant of full-arch fixed implant-supported prostheses will undergo ultrasonic debridement combined with erythritol air-polishing powder. Group 2: a separate contralateral quadrant of full-arch fixed implant-supported prostheses will undergo ultrasonic debridement. The 5-year trial will involve a total of 10 re-examinations per participant. The mucosal conditions around the implants will be recorded at 6-month intervals after restoration. Peri-implant submucosal plaque will be collected at each re-examination, and the bacterial flora will be analysed by 16s ribosomal RNA gene sequencing. X-ray examinations will be conducted at 12-month intervals to evaluate the marginal bone level around implants.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This prospective single-centre, randomised controlled trial (PKUSSIRB-202054045) has been approved by the Ethics Committee of Stomatology School and Hospital of Peking University. Data will be registered with the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Additionally, we will disseminate the results via publication in scientific journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR-2000032431.

Novel Approach to Dental Biofilm Management through Guided Biofilm Therapy (GBT): A Review

Dental biofilm plays a very crucial role in the etiopathogenesis of periodontal andperi-implant diseases. Over the past decade, tremendous research has been carried outto know the structure of biofilm and the mechanism by which it causes the destruction of supporting tissues of tooth or implant. Periodontal or peri-implant therapy usually begins with primarily removing thebiofilm and is considered as non-surgical mechanical debridement. Although scaling and root planing (SRP) is regarded as a gold standard for mechanical plaque debridement, various other means of biofilm removal have constantly been evolving. These may vary from different scaling systems such as vector systems to decontamination of pockets with LASER therapy. Nowadays, a new concept has emerged known as “guided biofilm therapy” (GBT). It is beneficial in removing the biofilm around the tooth and implant structures, resulting in better or comparable clinical outcomes than SRP. These results were substantiated with the reduction in the microbial load as well as the reduction in the inflammatory cytokines. This review will highlight the various aspects of GBT used in periodontal and peri-implant disease.

Erythritol airpolishing in the non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: A randomized controlled trial

Objectives

To compare erythritol air polishing with piezoelectric ultrasonic scaling in the non‐surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis.

Material and methods

Eighty patients (n = 139 implants) with peri‐implantitis (probing pocket depth (PPD) ≥5 mm, marginal bone loss (MBL) ≥2 mm as compared to bone level at implant placement, bleeding, and/or suppuration on probing (BoP/SoP)) were randomly allocated to air polishing or ultrasonic treatment. The primary outcome was mean BoP (%) at 3 months after therapy (T3). Secondary outcomes were mean SoP (%), plaque score (Plq) (%), PPD (mm), MBL (mm), full mouth periodontal scores (FMPS) (%), levels of 8 classical periodontal pathogens, and treatment pain/discomfort (Visual Analog Scale, VAS). Patients who were considered successful at T3 were additionally assessed at 6, 9, and 12 months. Differences between both groups were analyzed using multilevel statistics.

Results

Three months after therapy, no significant difference in mean BoP (%) between the air polishing and ultrasonic therapy was found (crude analysis β (95% CI) −0.037 (−0.147; 0.073), p = .380). Neither secondary outcomes SoP (%), Plq (%), PPD (mm), MBL (mm), FMPS (%), and periodontal pathogens showed significant differences. Treatment pain/discomfort was low in both groups (VAS score airpolishing group 2.1 (±1.9), ultrasonic 2.6 (±1.9); p = .222). All successfully treated patients at T3 (18.4%) were still considered successful at 12‐month follow‐up.

Conclusions

Erythritol air polishing seems as effective as piezoelectric ultrasonic scaling in the non‐surgical treatment of peri‐implantitis, in terms of clinical, radiographical, and microbiological parameters. However, neither of the proposed therapies effectively resolved peri‐implantitis. Hence, the majority of patients required further surgical treatment.

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.

Effect of a single initial phase of non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: Abrasive air polishing versus ultrasounds. A prospective randomized controlled clinical study

Background

Non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis includes a correct mechanical debridement of the implant surface to reduce the inflammation and recondition the soft tissues. The aim of the study was to evaluate the results of a single phase of non-surgical therapy by comparing the effect of curettes and ultrasounds versus curettes and abrasive air polisher (Air-Flow) in the peri-implant tissue conditions, and patient satisfaction.

Material and Methods

A double-blind randomized and controlled prospective clinical study was conducted on patients in peri-implant maintenance phase diagnosed of peri-implantitis treated in the Oral Surgery Unit of the Stomatology Department of the Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry of the University of Valencia, between September of 2017 and May of 2018. They were divided into 2 groups: Group 1: curettes and ultrasounds, and Group 2: curettes and Air-Flow. The clinical and radiological baseline parameters were evaluated after 3-weeks of treatment, as well as patient satisfaction.

Results

The sample included 34 patients. Group 1 (17 patients, 38 implants) and Group 2 (17 patients, 32 implants). All the variables improved statistically significantly after treatment in both groups, with the exception of recessions and keratinized mucosa and bone loss that did not vary. When comparing both groups, the type of treatment did not influence the majority of the variables, with the exception of the plaque index (p=0.011) and modified bleeding index from the palatine (p=0.048), which reduced statistically significant in the group 2, as well as the patient satisfaction which was higher in the group 2 (p<0.001).

Conclusions

An initial phase of non-surgical treatment achieves an improvement of the peri-implant clinical parameters, thought the method of debridement used seems not to influence.

Key words:Peri-implantitis, peri-implant disease, non-surgical treatment, air-abrasive device, mechanical debridement.

Evaluation of air polishing with a sterile powder and mechanical debridement during regenerative surgical periimplantitis treatment: a study in dogs

Objectives

To evaluate the effectiveness of mechanical debridement and/or air polishing on the healing of ligature-induced buccal periimplantitis dehiscence defects in dogs.

Material and methods

Forty-eight implants were placed in the mandibles of twelve beagle dogs, and periimplantitis was induced for 2 months using ligatures. The resulting buccal dehiscence-type defects were surgically cleaned and augmented (xenogenic filler and resorbable membrane) according to one of the following treatments: (1) Cleaning with carbon curette (debridement - D) and guided bone regeneration (GBR/G): DG, (2) air polishing cleaning (A) and GBR: AG, (3) a combination of D/A/G: DAG, and (4) D/A without GBR: DA. After 2 months, histomorphometric and inflammatory evaluations were conducted.

Results

The median bone gain after therapy ranged between 1.2 mm (DG) and 2.7 mm (AG). Relative bone gain was between 39% (DG) and 59% (AG). The lowest inflammation scores were obtained in DA without GBR (5.84), whereas significantly higher values between 8.2 and 9.4 were found in the groups with augmentation. At lingual sites without defects, scores ranged from 4.1 to 5.9. According to ISO, differences above 2.9 were considered representative for irritative properties.

Conclusions

All treatments resulted in partial regeneration of the defects. No treatment group showed a significantly (p < 0.05) better outcome. However, pretreatment with air polishing showed a tendency for less inflammation. Noteworthy, inflammation assessment showed an overall irritative potential after GBR in the evaluated early healing phase.

Clinical relevance

Periimplantitis treatment still represents a big issue in daily practice and requires additional preclinical research in order to improve treatment concepts.

Emphysema following air-powder abrasive treatment for peri-implantitis

Background

Subcutaneous emphysema refers to swelling caused by the presence of air or gas in the interstices of loose connective tissue. In the head and neck area, it may follow the fascial planes and is characterized by sudden swelling, crepitus on palpation, infrequent pain, and air emboli on radiography. It usually occurs as a complication in dental treatment. Some reports have described subcutaneous emphysema caused by dental procedures; however, severe emphysema related to peri-implantitis after treatment has not been documented. Accordingly, the current report describes a rare case of subcutaneous cervical emphysema resulting from the use of an air-powder abrasive device to treat peri-implantitis.

Case presentation

Based on a review of the existing literature and the present case, nine cases of subcutaneous emphysema due to air-powder abrasive device have been reported. In most cases, the emphysema resolved over time after treatment with prophylactic antibiotics; among these, two were related to peri-implantitis management.

Conclusion

Considering the frequent use of air-powder abrasive devices to treat peri-implantitis, the potential risk of iatrogenic emphysema related to this procedure needs to be addressed more extensively.

Implant decontamination with phosphoric acid during surgical peri-implantitis treatment: a RCT

Background

Peri-implantitis is known as an infectious disease that affects the peri-implant soft and hard tissue. Today, scientific literature provides very little evidence for an effective intervention protocol for treatment of peri-implantitis. The aim of the present randomized controlled trial is to evaluate the microbiological and clinical effectiveness of phosphoric acid as a decontaminating agent of the implant surface during surgical peri-implantitis treatment.

Methods

Peri-implantitis lesions were treated with resective surgical treatment aimed at peri-implant granulation tissue removal, bone recontouring, and pocket elimination. Fifty-three implant surfaces in 28 patients were mechanically cleaned and treated with either 35% phosphoric etching gel (test group) or sterile saline (control group). Microbiological samples were obtained during surgery; clinical parameters were recorded at baseline and at 3 months after treatment. Data were analyzed using multi-variable linear regression analysis and multilevel statistics.

Results

Significant immediate reductions in total anaerobic bacterial counts on the implant surface were found in both groups. Immediate reduction was greater when phosphoric acid was used. The difference in log-transformed mean anaerobic counts between both procedures was not statistical significant (p = 0.108), but there were significantly less culture-positive implants after the decontamination procedure in the phosphoric acid group (p = 0.042). At 3 months post-surgery, 75% of the implants in the control group and 63.3% of the implants in the test group showed disease resolution. However, no significant differences in clinical and microbiological outcomes between both groups were found.

Conclusions

The application of 35% phosphoric acid after mechanical debridement is superior to mechanical debridement combined with sterile saline rinsing for decontamination of the implant surface during surgical peri-implantitis treatment. However, phosphoric acid as implant surface decontaminant does not seem to enhance clinical outcomes on a 3-month follow-up.

Trial registration

Netherlands National Trial Register, NTR5185 (www.trialregister.nl)