• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.809-822
• /
• 1998

Adequate root preparation in the treatment of periodontal disease often involves mechanical instrumentation to remove plaque, calculus perhaps contaminated cementum. Although meticulous scaling and root planing may remove some cementum, the use of aggressive root planing to remove cementum does not appear warranted. So ultrasonic device and rotary instrument appear to be replacing hand instrument. But it is not clear those instruments make smooth root surface as hand instrument. The roghness of the root surface were evaluate with SEM following instrumentation with Gracey curette, Perio Clean and piezo ultrasonic device(Setlec) with various tip. 20 extracted teeth were used in vitro experiment, and 9 teeth of a patient destined for extraction for periodontal reasons were utilized in vivo experiment. It was demonstrated that hand curette created the smoothest surface, while diamond tip tended to roughen the root surface. But the hand curette, Perio Clean, and piezo ultasonic device with scaler tip tend to remove cementum completely. Piezo ultrasonic device with curette-like tip made the desirable smooth surface with partial removal of cementum.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.823-828
• /
• 1998

A primary goal of periodontal therapy is the creation of root surfaces that are free of plaque and calculus. It is not yet to be determined whether it is desirable to have a smooth root surface after treatment. It is also not clear what degree of roughness result from different instruments. In the present study various instruments for root surface debridement were evaluated. 20 extracted teeth were utilized, and the teeth were treated with one of the following instrument: Gracey curette, Perio Clean, and piezo ultrasonic device(Setlec, P Max) with general scaler tip, curette-like tip, and diamond tip. 3 dimensional planimetric device(Accura) was used to evaluate the average surface roughness. It was demonstrated hand and power-driven instruments did not have a significant difference in roughness of the root surface following instrumentation. And ultrasonic scaler tip tended to make a most smooth surface than other instruments. The possible reasons of the result were discussed.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.351-372
• /
• 1998

The purpose of this study was to evaluate in vitro effects of the loss of tooth substance and root surface changes following root planing with various periodontal instruments. The 39 extracted human teeth due to severe periodontal disease were included. The total 50 root surfaces of 30 teeth were root planed with following instruments : Group 1, with Gracey curette, Group 2, with ultrasonic scaler, Group 3, with rotating root planing bur, Group 4, with Gracey curette plus rubber cup polishing, and Group 5, with ultrasonic scaler plus rubber cup polishing. Following root planing, the amount of tooth substance loss was evaluated by measuring the weight of the removed tooth substance and then 5 specimens ($5{\times}5{\times}2mm$) were randomly selected from the each group for roughness measurement. Root planed areas of each specimen were subjected to five measurements using the Profilometer and an average surface roughness values(Ra) for each group was obtained. Statistical difference for roughness values of each group was analyzed using oneway ANOVA and student t-test. For scanning electron microscopic(SEM) examination of root surface changes following root planing, 15 root surfaces of remaining 9 teeth were root planed and 3 specimens were randomly selected. The mean loss of tooth substance removed was Group 1, $7.0{\pm}1.09mg$, Group 2, $1.3{\pm}1.00mg$, Group 3, $5.8{\pm}1.72mg$, Group 4, $8.7{\pm}1.34mg$, and Group 5, $4.5{\pm}1.68mg$ following root palning, respectively. These results indicate that curette is effective instrument in the respect of diseased root substance removal. The average surface roughness values are following results : Group 1 and Group 4 were the smoothest surface ($Ra=0.34{\pm}0.06{\mu}m$, $Ra=0.34{\pm}0.04{\mu}m$, respectively) and Group 2 was the roughest surface ($Ra=2.09{\pm}0.06{\mu}m$). Statistical analysis of roughness values demonstrated a highly significant difference (P<0.05) between each experimental groups. However, no statistically significant difference in roughness values were observed between the Group 1 and Group 4. The results in this study suggest that curette and/or polishing procedure should be done after root planing with ultrasonic scaler and caution should be used with dia-mond-coated bur during routine root planing procedure.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.53 no.4
• /
• pp.295-305
• /
• 2023

Purpose: Various methods have been proposed to achieve the nearly complete decontamination of the surface of implants affected by peri-implantitis. We investigated the in vitro debridement efficiency of multiple decontamination methods (Gracey curettes [GC], glycine air-polishing [G-Air], erythritol air-polishing [E-Air] and titanium brushes [TiB]) using a novel spectrophotometric ink-model in 3 different bone defect settings (30°, 60°, and 90°). Methods: Forty-five dental implants were stained with indelible ink and mounted in resin models, which simulated standardised peri-implantitis defects with different bone defect angulations (30°, 60°, and 90°). After each run of instrumentation, the implants were removed from the resin model, and the ink was dissolved in ethanol (97%). A spectrophotometric analysis was performed to detect colour remnants in order to measure the cumulative uncleaned surface area of the implants. Scanning electron microscopy images were taken to assess micromorphological surface changes. Results: Generally, the 60° bone defects were the easiest to debride, and the 30° defects were the most difficult (ink absorption peak: 0.26±0.04 for 60° defects; 0.32±0.06 for 30° defects; 0.27±0.04 for 90° defects). The most effective debridement method was TiB, independently of the bone defect type (TiB vs. GC: P<0.0001; TiB vs. G-Air: P=0.0017; TiB vs. GE-Air: P=0.0007). GE-Air appeared to be the least efficient method for biofilm debridement. Conclusions: T-brushes seem to be a promising decontamination method compared to the other techniques, whereas G-Air was less aggressive on the implant surface. The use of a spectrophotometric model was shown to be a novel but promising assessment method for in vitro ink studies.