Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2021; 15(03): 407-411
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1721550
Original Article

Dental Implants Surface in vitro Decontamination Protocols

Vanessa Coelho Batalha
1   Department of Periodontics and Implant Dentistry, Ingá University Center–Uningá, Maringá, Brazil
,
Raquel Abreu Bueno
1   Department of Periodontics and Implant Dentistry, Ingá University Center–Uningá, Maringá, Brazil
,
Edemar Fronchetti Junior
1   Department of Periodontics and Implant Dentistry, Ingá University Center–Uningá, Maringá, Brazil
,
José Ricardo Mariano
2   Department of Implant Dentistry, Unieuro University Center, Brasília, Brazil
,
Gabriela Cristina Santin
3   Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Ingá University Center–Uningá, Maringá, Brazil
,
Karina Maria Salvatore Freitas 
4   Department of Orthodontics, Ingá University Center–Uningá, Maringá, Brazil
,
Mariana Aparecida Lopes Ortiz
5   Department of Microbiology, Ingá University Center–Uningá, Maringá, Brazil
,
Samira Salmeron
1   Department of Periodontics and Implant Dentistry, Ingá University Center–Uningá, Maringá, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The number of patients rehabilitated with dental implants has contributed to increased incidence of peri-implant diseases. Due to complex and difficult treatment, peri-implantitis is a challenge and an efficient clinical protocol is not yet established. Aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of two protocols for in vitro decontamination of dental implants surface.

Materials and Methods Twenty titanium implants (BioHE-Bioconect) were used. Implants were divided into five groups (n = 4). NC group (negative control): sterile implants; PC group (positive control): biofilm contaminated implants; S group: biofilm contaminated implants, brushed with sterile saline; SB group: biofilm contaminated implants, brushed with sterile saline and treated with air-powder abrasive system with sodium bicarbonate (1 minute); and antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (aPDT) group: biofilm contaminated implants, brushed with sterile saline and treated with antimicrobial photodynamic therapy (red laser + toluidine blue O). The implants were contaminated in vitro with subgingival biofilm and distributed in groups PC, S, SB, and aPDT. Each group received the respective decontamination treatment, except groups NC and PC. Then, all implants were placed in tubes containing culture medium for later sowing and counting of colony-forming units (CFUs).

Statistical Analysis One-way analysis of variance and Tukey tests were performed, at 5% significance level.

Results Significantly fewer CFUs were observed in the aPDT group (19.38 × 105) when compared with groups SB (26.88 × 105), S (47.75 × 105), and PC (59.88 × 105) (p < 0.01). Both the aPDT and SB groups were statistically different from the NC group (p < 0.01).

Conclusion Proposed protocols, using air-powder abrasive system with sodium bicarbonate and aPDT, showed to be efficacious in the decontamination of dental implants surface in vitro.

Keywords

peri-implantitis - sodium bicarbonate - photodynamic therapy - dental implants - decontamination


Publication History

Article published online:
07 December 2020

© 2020. European Journal of Dentistry. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Quirynen M, Herrera D, Teughels W, Sanz M. Implant therapy: 40 years of experience. Periodontol 2000 2014; 66 (01) 7-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Pjetursson BE, Asgeirsson AG, Zwahlen M, Sailer I. Improvements in implant dentistry over the last decade: comparison of survival and complication rates in older and newer publications. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014; 29 (Suppl) 308-324
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Dreyer H, Grischke J, Tiede C. et al. Epidemiology and risk factors of peri-implantitis: a systematic review. J Periodontal Res 2018; 53 (05) 657-681
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Lee CT, Huang YW, Zhu L, Weltman R. Prevalences of peri-implantitis and peri-implant mucositis: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2017; 62: 1-12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Caton JG, Armitage G, Berglundh T. et al. A new classification scheme for periodontal and peri-implant diseases and conditions - introduction and key changes from the 1999 classification. J Periodontol 2018; 89 (Suppl. 01) S1-S8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Berglundh T, Armitage G, Araujo MG. et al. Peri-implant diseases and conditions: consensus report of workgroup 4 of the 2017 World Workshop on the Classification of Periodontal and Peri-Implant Diseases and Conditions. J Periodontol 2018; 89 (Suppl. 01) S313-S318
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Berglundh T, Jepsen S, Stadlinger B, Terheyden H. Peri-implantitis and its prevention. Clin Oral Implants Res 2019; 30 (02) 150-155
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Schwarz F, Derks J, Monje A, Wang HL. Peri-implantitis. J Periodontol 2018; 89 (Suppl. 01) S267-S290
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Rokaya D, Srimaneepong V, Wisitrasameewon W, Humagain M, Thunyakitpisal P. Peri-implantitis update: risk indicators, diagnosis, and treatment. Eur J Dent 2020; 14 (04) 672-682
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Figuero E, Graziani F, Sanz I, Herrera D, Sanz M. Management of peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Periodontol 2000 2014; 66 (01) 255-273
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Matsubara VH, Leong BW, Leong MJL, Lawrence Z, Becker T, Quaranta A. Cleaning potential of different air abrasive powders and their impact on implant surface roughness. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2020; 22 (01) 96-104
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Ramanauskaite A, Daugela P, Juodzbalys G. Treatment of peri-implantitis: meta-analysis of findings in a systematic literature review and novel protocol proposal. Quintessence Int 2016; 47 (05) 379-393
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Shibli JA. Is laser the best choice for the treatment of peri-implantitis?. Photomed Laser Surg 2018; 36 (11) 569-570
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Fraga RS, Antunes LAA, Fontes KBFDC, Küchler EC, Iorio NLPP, Antunes LS. Is antimicrobial photodynamic therapy effective for microbial load reduction in peri-implantitis treatment? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Photochem Photobiol 2018; 94 (04) 752-759
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Koo KT, Khoury F, Keeve PL. et al. Implant surface decontamination by surgical treatment of periimplantitis: a literature review. Implant Dent 2019; 28 (02) 173-176
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Louropoulou A, Slot DE, Van der Weijden F. The effects of mechanical instruments on contaminated titanium dental implant surfaces: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014; 25 (10) 1149-1160
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Moharrami M, Perrotti V, Iaculli F, Love RM, Quaranta A. Effects of air abrasive decontamination on titanium surfaces: a systematic review of in vitro studies. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2019; 21 (02) 398-421
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Kotsovilis S, Karoussis IK, Trianti M, Fourmousis I. Therapy of peri-implantitis: a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol 2008; 35 (07) 621-629
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Salmeron S, Rezende ML, Consolaro A. et al. Laser therapy as an effective method for implant surface decontamination: a histomorphometric study in rats. J Periodontol 2013; 84 (05) 641-649
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Renvert S, Polyzois I. Treatment of pathologic peri-implant pockets. Periodontol 2000 2018; 76 (01) 180-190
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Sivaramakrishnan G, Sridharan K. Photodynamic therapy for the treatment of peri-implant diseases: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Photodiagn Photodyn Ther 2018; 21: 1-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 John G, Becker J, Schwarz F. Effectivity of air-abrasive powder based on glycine and tricalcium phosphate in removal of initial biofilm on titanium and zirconium oxide surfaces in an ex vivo model. Clin Oral Investig 2016; 20 (04) 711-719
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Tastepe CS, Liu Y, Visscher CM, Wismeijer D. Cleaning and modification of intraorally contaminated titanium discs with calcium phosphate powder abrasive treatment. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013; 24 (11) 1238-1246
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Moëne R, Décaillet F, Andersen E, Mombelli A. Subgingival plaque removal using a new air-polishing device. J Periodontol 2010; 81 (01) 79-88
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Wei MCT, Tran C, Meredith N, Walsh LJ. Effectiveness of implant surface debridement using particle beams at differing air pressures. Clin Exp Dent Res 2017; 3 (04) 148-153
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Quintero DG, Taylor RB, Miller MB, Merchant KR, Pasieta SA. Air-abrasive disinfection of implant surfaces in a simulated model of periimplantitis. Implant Dent 2017; 26 (03) 423-428
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Deppe H, Horch HH, Henke J, Donath K. Peri-implant care of ailing implants with the carbon dioxide laser. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001; 16 (05) 659-667
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Cai Z, Li Y, Wang Y. et al. Antimicrobial effects of photodynamic therapy with antiseptics on Staphylococcus aureus biofilm on titanium surface. Photodiagn Photodyn Ther 2019; 25: 382-388
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Hayek RR, Araújo NS, Gioso MA. et al. Comparative study between the effects of photodynamic therapy and conventional therapy on microbial reduction in ligature-induced peri-implantitis in dogs. J Periodontol 2005; 76 (08) 1275-1281
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Cieplik F, Deng D, Crielaard W. et al. Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy - what we know and what we don’t. Crit Rev Microbiol 2018; 44 (05) 571-589
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Wainwright M, Maisch T, Nonell S. et al. Photoantimicrobials-are we afraid of the light?. Lancet Infect Dis 2017; 17 (02) e49-e55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Chambrone L, Wang HL, Romanos GE. Antimicrobial photodynamic therapy for the treatment of periodontitis and peri-implantitis: an American Academy of Periodontology best evidence review. J Periodontol 2018; 89 (07) 783-803
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Sahrmann P, Gilli F, Wiedemeier DB, Attin T, Schmidlin PR, Karygianni L. The microbiome of peri-implantitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Microorganisms 2020; 8 (05) 8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Pérez-Chaparro PJ, Duarte PM, Shibli JA. et al. The current weight of evidence of the microbiologic profile associated with peri-implantitis: a systematic review. J Periodontol 2016; 87 (11) 1295-1304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Retamal-Valdes B, Formiga MC, Almeida ML. et al. Does subgingival bacterial colonization differ between implants and teeth? A systematic review. Braz Oral Res 2019; 33 (Suppl. 01) e064
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Lee ST, Subu MG, Kwon TG. Emphysema following air-powder abrasive treatment for peri-implantitis. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg 2018; 40 (01) 12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar