Effect of root planing on surface topography: an <i>in‐vivo</i> randomized experimental trial

Rosales-Leal, Juan Ignacio; Flores, Amaya; Contreras, T.; Bravo, Manuel; Cabrerizo-Vílchez, Miguel A.; Mesa, Francisco

doi:10.1111/jre.12195

Cited by 9 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The degree of surface alteration after manual debridement is related to various factors, primarily the presence of a sharp cutting edge and the moderate pressure necessary for calculus removal. On the other hand, the mechanism of action of ultrasonic devices is based on both the tip vibration and the cavitation effect, thus requiring light pressure . From the clinical perspective, an intact non‐contaminated and toxin‐free cement layer leads to higher adhesion of fibroblasts and epithelial binding to the tooth and represents a prerequisite in long‐term maintenance of periodontal health .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Root surface alterations following manual and mechanical scaling: A comparative study

Maritato

Orazi

Laurito

et al. 2018

Int J Dental Hygiene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Root surface alterations following manual and mechanical scaling: A comparative study

Maritato

Orazi

Laurito

et al. 2018

Int J Dental Hygiene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, it has been observed that after root planing, the topography of root surface does affect the consequent attachment of bacteria and consequently the outcome of treatment. [ 7 ]…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, thorough understanding of the outcomes of various treatment modalities on the topography of the root surface may hence be deemed necessary. [ 6 7 ]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative evaluation of manual scaling and root planing with or without magnification loupes using scanning electron microscope: A pilot study

Dadwal¹,

Kaur²,

Jindal³

et al. 2018

J Indian Soc Periodontol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim:The aim of the present study is to compare the amount of remaining calculus, loss of tooth substance, and roughness of root surface after scaling and root planing with or without magnification loupes using scanning electron microscope.Materials and Methods:In the study, 30 teeth indicated for extractions due to severe chronic generalized periodontitis were included in the study. In test Group I, scaling and root planing was performed without magnification loupes, and in test Group II, scaling and root planing was performed with magnification loupes before extraction. In control Group III, no procedure was performed. After scaling and root planing, teeth were extracted followed by preparation of specimens. Specimens were then sent for scanning electron microscope study.Results:Statistically significant (P ≤ 0.05) differences were found among different test groups. Results showed that test Group II with magnification loupes had less remaining calculus and smoother surface with lesser amount of loss of cementum layer.Conclusion:From this, it was concluded that test Group II was more efficient in root debridement than test Group 1, so scaling and root planing done with magnification loupes will cause less damage to the tooth surface.

show abstract

“…Manual curets have been the traditional means with which to accomplish root debridement and SRP. While being effective at achieving treatment goals, some of the disadvantages of curets include difficulty accessing complex root anatomy, 5 increased loss of cementum, 6 postoperative hypersensitivity and risk of pulp damage 7 . Ultrasonic instruments are commonly used to remove plaque and calculus from root surfaces without some of these disadvantages 8 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A prominent finding of this report was that there was no statistically significant difference between the magnetostrictive scaler and the control teeth, implying that though the magnetostrictive scaler removed surface deposits, it left the root surfaces with a roughness value approximating that of untreated surfaces. Another similar study comparing untreated teeth, manual curets, and two different piezoelectric devices found that all three treatment methods resulted in a smoother root surface as compared with the control teeth, implying that piezoelectric devices represent a valid alternative to manual instruments 7 . Given the varying benefits and limitations of all of the available treatment options, many clinicians elect to use both manual and ultrasonic instrumentation in combination 12 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro comparison of root surface roughness and bacterial adhesion following treatment with three different instruments

Haroon

Gregory

Hara

et al. 2021

Journal of Periodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: A novel device, piezoelectric 11 Gracey curet tip, reportedly combines benefits of a piezoelectric device and manual curet. The primary objective of this study was to compare root surface roughness outcomes between traditional manual curets and piezoelectric devices, as compared with this novel device. The secondary aim was to assess the level of adhesion of Streptococcus mutans on the root surface after instrumentation. Methods:The groups consisted of the following: 1) Gracey curet; 2) piezoelectric scaler; 3) piezoelectric 11 Gracey curet tip; and 4) untreated control. Root specimens were obtained from extracted human teeth and randomly assigned to each group. Surface roughness measurements (Ra and Rz) were taken with a profilometer before and after instrumentation. After instrumentation, root specimens were inoculated with S. mutans and biofilm was dislodged. Various dilutions of resuspended biofilm were incubated on blood agar plates and colony forming units (CFU) values were measured. Results: The experimental device resulted in significantly lower Ra and Rz compared with other groups (P < 0.01), and the Gracey curet was significantly lower than the piezoelectric tip and untreated control (P < 0.05). The Gracey curet and experimental device tip had significantly lower CFU values compared with the control (P < 0.05). There were no significant CFU value differences between the Gracey curet and both the piezoelectric and experimental device tips. There were no significant CFU differences between piezoelectric tip and both experimental device and control. There was no correlation between Ra and CFU values for Gracey curet, piezoelectric tip, or the control. However, correlation between Ra values and CFU approached significance for the experimental device (correlation = 0.66, P = 0.05). Conclusions: Piezoelectric 11 Gracey curet tip is effective at resulting in a significantly smoother surface compared with traditional piezoelectric and hand instruments. CFU values with piezoelectric 11 Gracey curet tip were significantly

show abstract

Effect of root planing on surface topography: an in‐vivo randomized experimental trial

Abstract: Both ultrasonic devices reduce the roughness, producing a similar topography to that observed after manual instrumentation with a curette, to which they appear to represent a valid alternative.

Cited by 9 publications

References 28 publications

Root surface alterations following manual and mechanical scaling: A comparative study

Root surface alterations following manual and mechanical scaling: A comparative study

Comparative evaluation of manual scaling and root planing with or without magnification loupes using scanning electron microscope: A pilot study

In vitro comparison of root surface roughness and bacterial adhesion following treatment with three different instruments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About