Analysis of Effectiveness of Different Rotational Instruments in Implantoplasty

Júnior, José Moisés de Souza; Souza, João Gustavo Oliveira de; Neto, Armando Lopes Pereira; Iaculli, Flavia; Piattelli, Adriano; Bianchini, Marco Aurélio

doi:10.1097/id.0000000000000381

Cited by 22 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Kappa scores regarding agreement on the articles to be included in the full‐text analysis and those finally chosen were 0.91 and 0.95, respectively ( p < 0.001). Out of a total of 391 records assessed, 26 publications were finally included: six laboratory (Chan et al, ; Costa‐Berenguer et al, ; Gehrke, Aramburú Júnior, Dedavid, & Shibli, ; Sharon, Shapira, Wilensky, Abu‐Hatoum, & Smidt, ; de Souza Júnior et al, ; Tribst, Piva, Shibli, Borges, & Tango, ), two preclinical in vivo (Schwarz, Mihatovic, Golubovic, Becker, & Sager, ; Schwarz, Sahm, Mihatovic, Golubovic, & Becker, ), and 18 clinical publications (Englezos, Cosyn, Koole, Jacquet, & De Bruyn, ; Geremias et al, ; Matarasso et al, ; Nart, de Tapia, Pujol, Pascual, & Valles, ; Pommer et al, ; Ramanauskaite, Becker, Juodzbalys, & Schwarz, ; Romeo et al, ; Sapata, de Souza, Sukekava, Villar, & Neto, ; Schwarz et al, ; Schwarz, John, & Becker, ; Schwarz, John, Mainusch, Sahm, & Becker, ; Schwarz, John, Sahm, & Becker, ; Schwarz, John, Schmucker, Sahm, & Becker, ; Schwarz, Sahm, & Becker, ; Schwarz, Sahm, Iglhaut, et al, ; Suh, Simon, Jeon, Choi, & Kim, ; Thierbach & Eger, ). The two preclinical in vivo publications (Schwarz, Mihatovic, et al, ; Schwarz, Sahm, Mihatovic, et al, ) and the clinical of Romeo et al () and Romeo et al () publications reported on different aspects basically of the same study population.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanical and biological complications after implantoplasty—A systematic review

Stavropoulos

Bertl

Eren

et al. 2019

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Implantoplasty, that is, the mechanical modification of the implant, including thread removal and surface smoothening, has been proposed during surgical peri‐implantitis treatment. Currently, there is no information about any potential mechanical and/or biological complications after this approach. The aim of the current review was to systematically assess the literature to answer the focused question “Are there any mechanical and/or biological complications due to implantoplasty?”. Materials and methods A systematic literature search was performed in three databases until 23/09/2018 to assess potential mechanical and/or biological complications after implantoplasty. All laboratory, preclinical in vivo, and clinical studies involving implantoplasty were included, and any complication potentially related to implantoplasty was recorded and summarized. Results Out of 386 titles, 26 publications were included in the present review (six laboratory, two preclinical in vivo, and 18 clinical studies). Laboratory studies have shown that implantoplasty does not result in temperature increase, provided proper cooling is used, but leads in reduced implant strength in “standard” dimension implants; further, preclinical studies have shown titanium particle deposition in the surrounding tissues. Nevertheless, no clinical study has reported any remarkable complication due to implantoplasty; among 217‐291 implants subjected to implantoplasty, no implant fracture was reported during a follow‐up of 3–126 months, while only a single case of mucosal discoloration, likely due to titanium particle deposition, has been reported. Conclusions Based on all currently available, yet limited, preclinical in vivo and clinical evidence, implantoplasty seems not associated with any remarkable mechanical or biological complications on the short‐ to medium‐term.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanical and biological complications after implantoplasty—A systematic review

Stavropoulos

Bertl

Eren

et al. 2019

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…6,26,27 Other studies have included rough and smooth diamond burs as well as carbide and silicon burs with various sequences. 6,17,18,19 de Souza et al 19 , demonstrated that three different rotational instruments: diamond, tungsten carbide and multilaminar burs resulted in similar surface roughness after performing implantoplasty procedures. However, the results from this study did not objectively standardised the time of instrumentation as it was determined by visual analysis of the operator only.…”

Section: A B C Dmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…7,17 This involves mechanically adjusting the exposed implant threads with rotary instruments to reduce the roughness of the surface and therefore minimise future plaque retention. 17,18,19,20 Although it is well accepted that the affected rough implant surface must be altered to minimise the establishment of biofilm, there is no current consensus in the literature regarding a suitable polishing protocol.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of standardised implantoplasty protocol on titanium surface roughness: an in-vitro study

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of standardised implantoplasty protocol on titanium surface roughness: an in-vitro study Abstract: To analyse the changes of surface characteristics of machined and moderately roughened titanium disks following a standardised implantoplasty protocol. Forty titanium discs (machined: n = 20; moderately roughened: n = 20) were instrumented with one half of each disc maintained as the control (non-instrumented). The standardised implantoplasty protocol was carried out using a custom jig with the sequential change of burs: 1) Regular grit diamond [10s], 2) Super-fine grit diamond [10s], 3) Brownie™ silicone polisher [15s], 4) Greenie™ silicone polisher [15s]. Surface topography was analysed using confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDS) was used to measure the elemental profiles of each disc. Quantitative analysis showed similar changes in level of roughness between the machined and moderately roughened titanium discs. CLSM demonstrated an increased roughness (Ra and Sa values) after polishing with a regular grit diamond bur when compared to the uninstrumented surfaces. Although the roughness decreased after the further polishing with the super-fine grit diamond bur, subsequent instrumentation using silicon burs tended to increase the roughness, albeit being statistically insignificant. There was a residue of silicon particles despite the irrigation after each polishing stage. The proposed implantoplasty protocol did not achieve a sufficient level of smoothness on the machined or moderately roughened titanium surfaces when compared to the Ra threshold. Further research is recommended to test the efficacy of each bur on titanium surfaces with longer duration using actual oral implants to allow better comparison.

show abstract

“…The patient signed an informed consent and 3 different treatments were proposed:Implantoplasty (at the area of implant 36) was performed according to the Schwarz et al protocol [9, 10]. …”

Section: Case Reportmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Implantoplasty (at the area of implant 36) was performed according to the Schwarz et al protocol [9, 10]. …”

Section: Case Reportmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biofilm Analysis of Retrieved Dental Implants after Different Peri-Implantitis Treatments

Geremias

Montero

Magini

et al. 2017

Case Reports in Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the current study was to analyse the planktonic growth of Streptococcus mutans on the surfaces of three implants retrieved after three different peri-implantitis treatments. Three implants from a male patient with high levels of bone loss were treated by mechanical debridement, chemical decontamination, and implantoplasty. After 4 months of follow-up, the implants were removed. The growth and biofilm formation were measured by spectrophotometry (OD630 nm) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM), after 48 hours of incubation. Results showed an average of Streptococcus mutans planktonic growth over the implants of 0.21 nm (mechanical debridement), 0.16 nm (chemical decontamination), and 0.15 nm (implantoplasty). Data were analysed by ANOVA and Tukey's test (p < 0.05 for chemical decontamination and implantoplasty). Implantoplasty and chemical decontamination showed the lowest levels of planktonic growth, indicating a possible influence of the modification procedures on the titanium surface on the initial biofilm attachment.

show abstract

Analysis of Effectiveness of Different Rotational Instruments in Implantoplasty

Cited by 22 publications

References 22 publications

Mechanical and biological complications after implantoplasty—A systematic review

Mechanical and biological complications after implantoplasty—A systematic review

The effect of standardised implantoplasty protocol on titanium surface roughness: an in-vitro study

Biofilm Analysis of Retrieved Dental Implants after Different Peri-Implantitis Treatments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About