Browse > Article

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF REMOVAL EFFECT ON ARTIFICIAL PLAQUE FROM RBM TREATED IMPLANT  

Park, Jae-Wan (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Dental Science Research Institute, Chonnam National University)
Kook, Min-Suk (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Dental Science Research Institute, Chonnam National University)
Park, Hong-Ju (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Dental Science Research Institute, Chonnam National University)
Shet, Uttom Kumar (2nd stage of Brain Korea 21, Chonnam National University)
Choi, Choong-Ho (2nd stage of Brain Korea 21, Chonnam National University)
Hong, Suk-Jin (2nd stage of Brain Korea 21, Chonnam National University)
Oh, Hee-Kyun (2nd stage of Brain Korea 21, Chonnam National University)
Publication Information
Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery / v.29, no.4, 2007 , pp. 309-320 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: This study was to evaluate the removal effect on artificial plaque from RBM treated implant surfaces that are exposed due to peri-implantitis. Materials and methods: Artificial plaque with Streptococcus mutans and acquired pellicle adhered to RBM treated implant discs. Study materials divided into one control and six test groups. In test groups, physical and chemical methods used to remove plaques. Prophyflex, Professional Mechanical Tooth Cleaning (PMTC) and interdental brush as mechanical treatments and 0.1% Chlorhexidine, Citric acid, HCl tetracycline as a chemical treatment were used. To analyses the study, disc weight was measured for remaining plaque quantities and SEM(Scanning Electronic Microscope) findings was taken for evaluation of surfaces. Results: 1. In weight changes, there was significant difference between each treatment group and the control group (p<0.05). Therefore all treatment methods using this study have good ability for remove plaques. 2. In weight changes, there was no significant difference between mechanical and chemical group, and there were no significant differences between each groups (p>0.05). 3. SEM findings after mechanical treatment disclosed as follows; Prophyflex group looked like sound implant surface, and there were some paste on implant surface at PMTC group, and there were some artificial plaque at interdental brush group. 4. SEM findings after chemical treatment disclosed as follows; there were some dark lesions which were supposed as the product from Streptococcus mutans at Chlorhexidine, Citric acid and HCl tetracycline groups. Conclusion: All six methods using in this study have good ability to remove artificial plaque on RBM treated implant. According to SEM findings, prophyflex is a superior method for removing of dental plaque among test groups.
Keywords
Dental plaque implant surface; RBM; Oral hygiene;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Silverstein LH, Garg A, Callan D et al : The key to success : maintaining the long-term health of implants. Dent Today 17 : 104, 1998   PUBMED
2 Shou S,Holmstrup P,Keiding NE : Microbiology of ligature- induced marginal inflammation around osseointegrated implants and ankylosed teeth in cynomolgus monkeys( Macaca fascicularis). Clin Oral Impl Res 7 : 190, 1996   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Isidor E : Loss of osseointegration caused by occlusal load of oral implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 7 : 143, 1996   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
4 Chairay JP,Boulekbache H,Jean A et al : Scanning electron microscopic evaluation of effects of an air-abrasive system on dental implants : A comparative in vitro study between machined and plasma-sprayed titanium surfaces. J Periodontol 68 : 1215, 1997   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
5 Song WS, Kwon YH, Lee MS, Park JB, Herr Y : Scanning electron microscopic study of the effects of citric on the change of implant surface according to application time. J Kor Acad Periodontology 32 : 697, 2002   DOI
6 Lee H, Kim SG, Kim BK et al : Experiments on animals about AVANA SS-I fixture spraying hydroxyapatite powder. Dent implant 3 : 45-51, 2003
7 Matarasso S, Quaremba G, Coraggio F et al : Maintenance of implants: an in vitro study of titanium implant surface modifications subsequent to the application of different prophylaxis procedures. Clin Oral Impl Res 7 : 64, 1996   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Cooley RL,Brown FH,Lubow RM : Evaluation of airpowder abrasive prophylaxis unit. Gen Dent 38 : 24, 1990   PUBMED
9 Parham PL, Cobb CM, French AA et al : Effects of an air-powder abrasive system on plasma-sprayed titanium implant surfaces: An in vitro evaluation. J Oral Implantol 15 : 78, 1989   PUBMED
10 Finger lM, Guerra IR : Prosthetic consideration reconstructive implantology. Dent North Am 30 : 69, 1986
11 Lang NP,Bragger U,Walther O et al : Ligature-induced peri-implant infection in cynomolgus monkey. Clin Oral Impl Res 4 : 2, 1993   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Kiger RD, Nylund K, Feller RP : A comparison of proximal plaque removal using floss and interdental brushes. J Clin Periodontol 18 : 681, 1991   DOI   PUBMED
13 Lindhe J,Berglundh T,Ericsson I et al : Experimental breakdown of peri-implant and periodontal tissues. Clin Oral Impl Res 3 : 9, 1992   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Nakazato G, Tsuchiya H, Sato M : In vivo plaque formation on implant materials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 4 : 321, 1989   PUBMED
15 Zarb GA, Schmitt A : The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated dental implants. The Toronto study : part I, surgical results. J Prosthet Dent 63 : 451, 1990   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Albreksson T,Zarb G,Worthinton P et al : The longterm efficacy of currently used dental implants: A review and prognosis criteria for success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1 : 11, 1986   PUBMED
17 Meffert RM : The soft tissue interface in dental implantology. Int J Oral Implantol 5 : 55, 1988   PUBMED
18 Lavelle CL : Mucosal seal around end osseous dental implants. Oral Implantol 9 : 357, 1981
19 Bergenholz A, Olssen A : Efficacy of plaque removal using interdental brushes and waxed dental floss. Scan J Dent Res 92 : 198, 1984
20 Gristina AG : Biomaterial-centered infection : microbial adhesion versus tissue integration. Science 237 : 1588, 1987   DOI   PUBMED
21 Shin WC, Kang SG, Kim DK : The effectiveness of maintenance care by non - surgical treatment on the periodontal disease. J Korean Acad Dent Health 25 : 109, 2001
22 Axelsson P, Lindhe J : The effect of preventive programme on dental plaque. J Clin Periodontol 1 : 126, 1984   DOI
23 Barnes CM, Fleming LS,Muenninghoff LA : An SEM evaluation of the in-vivo effects of an air system on various implant surfaces. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 6 : 463, 1991   PUBMED
24 Rapley JW,Swan RH,Hallmon WW et al : The surface characteristics produced by various oral hygiene instruments and materials on titanium implant abutments. lnt J Oral Maxillofac Implants 5 : 47, 1990
25 Quirynen M, de Soete M, van Steenberghe D : Infectious risks for oral implants: a review of the literature. Clin Oral Impl Res 13 : 1, 2002   DOI   ScienceOn
26 Zablotsky MH,Diedrich DL,Meffert RM : Detoxication of endotoxin-contaminated titanium and hydroxyapatitecoated surfaces utilizing various Chemotherapeutic and mechanical modalities. Implant Dent 1 : 154, 1992   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
27 Homing G : Clinical use of an air-powder abrasive. Compend Contin Educ Dent 8 : 652, 1987
28 Slots J, Rams TE : Microbiology of periodontal disease, In J. Slots and M. A. Taubman (ed), Contemporary oral microbiology and immunology. Mosby Year Book, St. Louis, Mo 1992, p.425
29 Meffert RM,Langer B, Fritz ME : Dental implant : A review. J Periodontol 63 : 859, 1992   DOI   PUBMED
30 Fox SC, Moriarry 1D, Kusy RP : The effects of scaling titanium implant surfaces with metal and plastic instruments : an in vitro study. J Periodontol 61 : 485, 1990   DOI   PUBMED
31 Kim WY, Lee MS, Park JB, Herr Y : Scanning electron microscopic study of the effect of tetracycline-HCl on the change of implant surface microstruccture according to application time. J Kor Acad Periodontology 32 : 523, 2002   DOI
32 Lee SG, Lim SB, Chung CH, Kwon SH : Analysis of surface form change after performing prophylaxis procedure on implant surface using various oral hygiene instruments. J Kor Acad Periodontology 34 : 1, 2004   DOI
33 Isidor E : Histological evaluation of peri-implant bone at implants subjected to occlusal overload or plaque accumulation. Clin Oral Implants Res 8 : 1, 1997   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
34 Weaks LM,Lescher NB,Barnes CM et al : Clinical evaluation of The Prophy-jet (R) as an instrument for routine removal of tooth stain and plaque. J Periodontol 55 : 486, 1984   DOI   PUBMED
35 Albrektsson T,Zarb G,Worthington P et al : The longterm efficacy of currently used dental implants. A review of proposed criteria of sucess. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1 : 11, 1986   PUBMED
36 Dennison DK,Huerzeler MB,Quinones C et al :Contaminated implant surfaces : An in vitro comparison of implant surface coating and treatment madalities for decontamination. Periodontol 65 : 942, 1994   DOI   ScienceOn
37 Gibbons RJ, J. van Houte : Bacterial adherence in oral microbial ecology. Annu. Rev. Microbiol 29 : 19, 1975   DOI   ScienceOn
38 Bair RE,Meyer AE : Implant surface preparation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 3 : 9, 1988   PUBMED
39 Hobo S,Ichida E, Garcia LT : Osseointegration and occlusal rehabilitation. Quintessence Publishing Co, 1989
40 Silverstein LH, Kurtzman GM : Oral hygiene and maintenance of dental implants. Dent Today 25 : 70, 2006   PUBMED