Cleaning ability and induced dentin loss of a magnetostrictive ultrasonic instrument at different power settings

Abstract

Some laboratory studies have evaluated the oscillation mode of ultrasonic scalers. None of them recorded its influence on calculus removal and quantified dental hard tissue loss. This study aimed to compare the performance of a magnetostrictive ultrasonic instrument at different power settings in vitro in relation to the tip oscillation activity. The oscillation activity of the straight Slimline® insert in the Cavitron® ultrasonic scaling device was analyzed at five different power settings with the help of two laser vibrometers. The performance of this instrument was tested on 60 roots of human single-rooted teeth. Twelve roots each were randomly assigned to be instrumented at a given power setting. Every root was instrumented for 120 s at a standardized instrumentation force of 0.1 ± 0.05 N. In addition, another 30 periodontally involved roots with subgingival calculus were instrumented accordingly to assess the calculus removal potential. The surface characteristics after instrumentation were analyzed under scanning electron microscope. The instrumentation at minimum power setting resulted in an mean increase of the root surface roughness of 0.18 ± 0.28 compared to 0.51 ± 0.48 at maximum power setting (P = 0.0327). The loss of dental hard tissue amounted to 11.37 ± 3.64 at minimum compared to 23.37 ± 15.76 at maximum power (P = 0.0010). The higher the power setting, the more calculus was removed. The values of the latter ranged between 4.04 ± 1.87 and 11.26 ± 4.66 mm² of cleaned dentin surface area (P = 0.0065). At lower power settings, a more favorable relation between cleaning ability, loss of dentine, and surface roughness was found. cleaned dentin surface area (P=0.0065). At lower power settings, a more favourable relation between cleaning ability, loss of dentine and surface roughness was found.

Effects of a new magnetostrictive ultrasonic scaler and a traditional piezoelectric ultrasonic scaler on root surfaces and patient complaints

“…However, this placement did not guarantee similar working performance due to differences in working principles. In previous studies, it was confirmed that the higher the output power of the scaler is, the more effective it is 30 . Therefore, it is possible that the output power of the magnetostrictive scaler is greater than that of the piezoelectric scaler.…”

Preservation of root cementum: a comparative evaluation of power‐driven versus hand instruments

“…The in vitro evaluation of substance loss of dental tissue has been described by various investigators using different periodontal treatment methods . All of the periodontal treatment methods used in this study have demonstrated the removal of cementum, although AP alone eliminated less cementum than HC or U.…”

“…Similarly, Bless et al . found that rougher surfaces occurred after treatment with ultrasonic scalers when compared to treatment with hand curettes. The SEM results of this study have shown that smoother root surfaces can be obtained with HC when compared to U.…”

“…Subgingival instrumentation during periodontal therapy results in the removal of root cementum, which can eventually lead to exposure of dentinal tubules, pulp injury and dentin hypersensitivity . The in vitro studies, including establishing in vitro experimental models under standardized experimental conditions, evaluated the amount of cementum with various instruments or force combinations . Several studies that have shown the effects of different instruments on root surfaces emphasized that periodontal treatment can be performed less aggressively with respect to the removal of cementum .…”