Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Significance of implant design on the efficacy of different peri-implantitis decontamination protocols

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To assess the efficacy of three mechanical decontamination methods in four types of commercially available implants.

Material and methods

Ninety-six implants of four commercial brands with different designs (regarding thread depth and thread pitch) were soaked in a surrogate biofilm (ink) and air-dried. Circumferential standardized peri-implant defects with 6 mm in depth and 1.55 mm in width were custom-made with a 3D printer. Stained implants were inserted in the defects and instrumented with three different methods: a titanium brush (TNB), a metallic ultrasonic tip (IST) and an air abrasive (PF). Standardized photographs were taken vertically to the implant axis (flat view), and with angulations of 60° (upper view) and 120° (lower view) to the implant long axis. The percentage of residual stain (PRS) was calculated with the image analysis software. Scanning electron microscope evaluations were performed on the buccal aspect of the implants at the central level of the defect.

Results

The efficacy of PF was significantly inferior to the TNB and IST in all implant designs, while there were no significant differences between TNB and IST. IST showed significantly higher PRS in the implant with the highest thread pitch, while the TNB had the highest PRS in the implant with a marked reverse buttress-thread design. The micro-thread design had the lowest values of PRS for all decontamination methods. The apically facing threads represented the areas with highest PRS for all implant designs and decontamination methods.

Conclusion

Thread geometry influenced the access of the decontamination devices and in turn its efficacy. Implants with lower thread pitch and thread depth values appeared to have less residual staining.

Clinical relevance

Clinicians must be aware of the importance of thread geometry in the decontamination efficacy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Berglundh T, Armitage G, Araujo MG, Avila-Ortiz G, Blanco J, Camargo PM, Chen S, Cochran D, Derks J, Figuero E, Hammerle CHF, Heitz-Mayfield LJA, Huynh-Ba G, Iacono V, Koo KT, Lambert F, McCauley L, Quirynen M, Renvert S, Salvi GE, Schwarz F, Tarnow D, Tomasi C, Wang HL, Zitzmann N (2018) 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 89(Suppl 1):S313–s318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Derks J, Tomasi C (2015) Peri-implant health and disease. A systematic review of current epidemiology. J Clin Periodontol 42(Suppl 16):S158–S171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Tomasi C, Regidor E, Ortiz-Vigon A, Derks J (2019) Efficacy of reconstructive surgical therapy at peri-implantitis-related bone defects. A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol 46(Suppl 21):340–356

  4. Faggion CM Jr, Chambrone L, Listl S, Tu YK (2013) Network meta-analysis for evaluating interventions in implant dentistry: the case of peri-implantitis treatment. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 15(4):576–588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Carcuac O, Derks J, Abrahamsson I, Wennstrom JL, Petzold M, Berglundh T (2017) Surgical treatment of peri-implantitis: 3-year results from a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Clin Periodontol 44(12):1294–1303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Persson LG, Araujo MG, Berglundh T, Grondahl K, Lindhe J (1999) Resolution of peri-implantitis following treatment. An experimental study in the dog. Clin Oral Implants Res 10(3):195–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Roccuzzo M, Pittoni D, Roccuzzo A, Charrier L, Dalmasso P (2017) Surgical treatment of peri-implantitis intrabony lesions by means of deproteinized bovine bone mineral with 10% collagen: 7-year-results. Clin Oral Implants Res 28(12):1577–1583

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Schwarz F, Jepsen S, Herten M, Sager M, Rothamel D, Becker J (2006) Influence of different treatment approaches on non-submerged and submerged healing of ligature induced peri-implantitis lesions: an experimental study in dogs. J Clin Periodontol 33(8):584–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Schwarz F, Claus C, Becker K (2017) Correlation between horizontal mucosal thickness and probing depths at healthy and diseased implant sites. Clin Oral Implants Res 28(9):1158–1163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Persson LG, Ericsson I, Berglundh T, Lindhe J (2001) Osseintegration following treatment of peri-implantitis and replacement of implant components. An experimental study in the dog. J Clin Periodontol 28(3):258–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Schwarz F, Sculean A, Bieling K, Ferrari D, Rothamel D, Becker J (2008) Two-year clinical results following treatment of peri-implantitis lesions using a nanocrystalline hydroxyapatite or a natural bone mineral in combination with a collagen membrane. J Clin Periodontol 35(1):80–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Schwarz F, Hegewald A, Sahm N, Becker J (2014) Long-term follow-up of simultaneous guided bone regeneration using native and cross-linked collagen membranes over 6 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 25(9):1010–1015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Roccuzzo M, Gaudioso L, Lungo M, Dalmasso P (2016) Surgical therapy of single peri-implantitis intrabony defects, by means of deproteinized bovine bone mineral with 10% collagen. J Clin Periodontol 43(3):311–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Froum SJ, Froum SH, Rosen PS (2015) A regenerative approach to the successful treatment of peri-implantitis: a consecutive series of 170 implants in 100 patients with 2- to 10-year follow-up. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 35(6):857–863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Deppe H, Horch HH, Neff A (2007) Conventional versus CO2 laser-assisted treatment of peri-implant defects with the concomitant use of pure-phase beta-tricalcium phosphate: a 5-year clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 22(1):79–86

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sahrmann P, Ronay V, Sener B, Jung RE, Attin T, Schmidlin PR (2013) Cleaning potential of glycine air-flow application in an in vitro peri-implantitis model. Clin Oral Implants Res 24(6):666–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sahrmann P, Ronay V, Hofer D, Attin T, Jung RE, Schmidlin PR (2015) In vitro cleaning potential of three different implant debridement methods. Clin Oral Implants Res 26(3):314–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ronay V, Merlini A, Attin T, Schmidlin PR, Sahrmann P (2017) In vitro cleaning potential of three implant debridement methods. Simulation of the non-surgical approach. Clin Oral Implants Res 28(2):151–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Charalampakis G, Ramberg P, Dahlen G, Berglundh T, Abrahamsson I (2015) Effect of cleansing of biofilm formed on titanium discs. Clin Oral Implants Res 26(8):931–936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Steiger-Ronay V, Merlini A, Wiedemeier DB, Schmidlin PR, Attin T, Sahrmann P (2017) Location of unaccessible implant surface areas during debridement in simulated peri-implantitis therapy. BMC Oral Health 17(1):137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Polak D, Maayan E, Chackartchi T (2017) The impact of implant design, defect size, and type of superstructure on the accessibility of nonsurgical and surgical approaches for the treatment of peri-implantitis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 32(2):356–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Abuhussein H, Pagni G, Rebaudi A, Wang HL (2010) The effect of thread pattern upon implant osseointegration. Clin Oral Implants Res 21(2):129–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Unursaikhan O, Lee JS, Cha JK, Park JC, Jung UW, Kim CS, Cho KS, Choi SH (2012) Comparative evaluation of roughness of titanium surfaces treated by different hygiene instruments. J Periodontal Implant Sci 42(3):88–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Keim D, Nickles K, Dannewitz B, Ratka C, Eickholz P, Petsos H (2019) In vitro efficacy of three different implant surface decontamination methods in three different defect configurations. Clin Oral Implants Res 30(6):550–558

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Laleman I, Cortellini S, De Winter S, Rodriguez Herrero E, Dekeyser C, Quirynen M, Teughels W (2017) Subgingival debridement: end point, methods and how often? Periodontol 75(1):189–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Cha JK, Paeng K, Jung UW, Choi SH, Sanz M, Sanz-Martin I (2019) The effect of five mechanical instrumentation protocols on implant surface topography and roughness: a scanning electron microscope and confocal laser scanning microscope analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 30(6):578–587

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mengel R, Buns CE, Mengel C, Flores-de-Jacoby L (1998) An in vitro study of the treatment of implant surfaces with different instruments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 13(1):91–96

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mann M, Parmar D, Walmsley AD, Lea SC (2012) Effect of plastic-covered ultrasonic scalers on titanium implant surfaces. Clin Oral Implants Res 23(1):76–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ruhling A, Kocher T, Kreusch J, Plagmann HC (1994) Treatment of subgingival implant surfaces with Teflon-coated sonic and ultrasonic scaler tips and various implant curettes. An in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res 5(1):19–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Boggan RS, Strong JT, Misch CE, Bidez MW (1999) Influence of hex geometry and prosthetic table width on static and fatigue strength of dental implants. J Prosthet Dent 82(4):436–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of Prof. Ji-Man Park with the 3D printed models.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (No. NRF-2019R1C1C1006622).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Ignacio Sanz-Martín and Kyeongwon Paeng contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section of graduate Periodontology, Faculty of Odontology, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Ignacio Sanz-Martín & Mariano Sanz

  2. Department of Periodontology, Research Institute for Periodontal Regeneration, Yonsei University College of Dentistry, 50-1, Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 120-752, South Korea

    Ignacio Sanz-Martín, Kyeongwon Paeng, Hyobin Park, Jae-Kook Cha & Ui-Won Jung

  3. ETEP (Etiology and Therapy of Periodontal Diseases) Research Group, University Complutense of Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Mariano Sanz

Authors
  1. Ignacio Sanz-Martín
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kyeongwon Paeng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hyobin Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jae-Kook Cha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ui-Won Jung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mariano Sanz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Ignacio Sanz-Martín: conception, design of the work, conduct of the experiment, data analysis and drafting the manuscript.

Kyeongwon Paeng: conduct of the experiment and data analysis.

Hyobin Park: conduct of the experiment and data analysis.

Jae-Kook Cha: conception, design of the work, conduct of the experiment, data analysis and support in manuscript writing.

Ui-Won Jung: critical revision of manuscript.

Mariano Sanz: critical revision of manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jae-Kook Cha.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Summary: Thread geometry influenced the access of the decontamination devices and in turn its efficacy.

Supplementary information

ESM 1

(DOCX 172 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sanz-Martín, I., Paeng, K., Park, H. et al. Significance of implant design on the efficacy of different peri-implantitis decontamination protocols. Clin Oral Invest 25, 3589–3597 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03681-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-020-03681-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation