Clinical evaluation of non-surgical cleaning modalities on titanium dental implants during maintenance care: a 1-year follow-up on prosthodontic superstructures.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate tissue health around implants with newly attached superstructures over 12 months of preventive maintenance appointments and instrumentation when necessary. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a randomized, split-mouth study 32 implants (8 participants with 4 implants each) received followed-up care every 3 months after superstructure attachment. Implants and superstructures were randomly assigned to four treatment groups and treated if necessary: (1) titanium curettes (TC), (2) stainless steel ultrasonic tip (PS), (3) erythritol air-polishing powder (EP), or (4) rubber cup polishing (CON). Probing depths (PDs), bleeding on probing (BOP), modified gingival (mucosal) bleeding index (GBI) around implants, and full-mouth Plaque Control Record (PCR) were measured every 3 months. Clinical attachment levels (CALs) and height of keratinized mucosa (KM)/gingival margins (GMs) for implants/teeth and PD, BOP, and GBI for teeth were documented at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Matrix metalloproteinase 8 (MMP-8) and periopathogens were measured at baseline and 12 months. RESULTS: Participants exhibited minimal signs of periodontal inflammation with statistically significant PD improvement (3.0 ± 0.2 to 2.8 ± 0.3 mm; p = 0.022) and overall CAL (4.3 ± 0.8 to 4.0 ± 0.7 mm; p = 0.048) after 1 year. Implants showed no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) between or within groups at baseline or 12 months for any parameter, except MMP-8 decreased significantly for PS (14.50 ± 17.58 to 4.63 ± 7.56 ng; p = 0.044), and after 12 months, PCR showed a significant difference between TC and PS (p = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment was necessary as inflammation was observed around newly placed superstructures within the first year of maintenance care. All tested treatment modalities yielded comparable clinical improvements. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Early assessment and diagnosis of mucositis and regular maintenance can promote long-lasting implant health.

Clinical and laboratory evaluation of the effects of different treatment modalities on titanium healing caps: a randomized, controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to evaluate the effects of treatment modalities on titanium surface characteristics and surrounding tissues. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighteen participants each had four titanium healing caps (HC) attached to four newly inserted implants. After healing, each HC was randomly assigned to either (1) titanium curettes (TC), (2) stainless steel ultrasonic tip (PS), (3) erythritol air-polishing powder (EP), or (4) only rubber cup polishing (CON). Probing depths (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), matrix metalloproteinase 8 (MMP-8), and periopathogens were recorded before and 3 months following instrumentation. After final assessments, HCs were removed, cleaned, and subjected to (a) bacterial colonization (Streptococcus gordonii, 24 h; mixed culture, 24 h) and (b) gingival fibroblasts (5 days). HC surfaces were analyzed with a scanning electron microscope (SEM). RESULTS: No significant differences between the groups were evident before or after instrumentation for PD and BOP (except TC showed a significant decrease in PD; p = 0.049). MMP-8 levels and bacterial loads were always very low. MMP-8 decreased further after instrumentation, while bacteria levels showed no change. No significant differences (p > 0.05) were evident in bacterial colonization or fibroblast attachment. A comparison of the overall mean SEM surface roughness scores showed a significant difference between all groups (p < 0.0001) with the lowest roughness after EP. CONCLUSIONS: All treatments performed yielded comparable outcomes and may be implemented safely. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clinicians may fear implant surface damage, but all instrumentation types are safe and non-damaging. They can be implemented as needed upon considering the presence of staining and soft and hard deposits.

Influence of different instrumentation modalities on the surface characteristics and biofilm formation on dental implant neck, in vitro.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate surface characteristics of implants after using different instruments and biofilm formation following instrumentation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-five commercially available dental implants were embedded into seven plastic models, attached to a phantom head and randomly assigned to seven instrumentation groups: (1) stainless steel (SSC) or (2) titanium curettes (TC); air-polisher using glycine-based (3) perio (PP) or (4) soft (SP) powders or (5) erythritol powder (EP); and an ultrasonic device using (6) stainless steel (PS) or (7) plastic-coated instruments (PI). Half of each implant neck in each group (n = 5) was treated once (30 s), while the other half was left uninstrumented (control). An eighth (8) treatment group used a bur/polisher to smooth two implants (SM). Following instrumentation implants were rinsed (5 ml Ringer's solution), analysed under a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and subjected twice (separately) to bacterial colonization with Streptococcus gordonii (2 h) and a mixed culture (S. gordonii, Actinomyces naeslundii, Fusobacterium nucleatum, Porphyromonas gingivalis and Tannerella forsythia; 24 h). RESULTS: Visual assessment of SEM pictures revealed surface modifications (smoothening to roughening) following instrumentation. These alterations differed between the instrument groups and from the control. Quantitative scoring of the photographs revealed that SSC caused a significantly rougher surface compared to other instruments (P < 0.05), except for SP (P = 0.057) and PP (P = 0.108). After bacterial colonization no significant differences (P > 0.05) were evident between instrumented or control surfaces in either culture. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, no significant differences were observed in the surface characteristics (except for SSC) or bacterial colonization based on one-time instrumentation.