Root surface roughness in response to periodontal instrumentation studied by combined use of microroughness measurements and scanning electron microscopy

Abstract

Root surface roughness, resulting from calculus removal by hand curette, ultrasonic curette and rotating diamond or Roto-Pro points, was examined by combined use of microroughness measurements and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Mandibular incisors were placed in a jaw model with a rubber "gingiva" in an attempt to simulate a clinical situation. After cleaning with the various instruments, the surface roughness was measured by an industrial profilometer followed by SEM evaluation. A microroughness index (MRI) was developed and showed that the instruments could be separated into three groups, where the hand curette produced least roughness, followed by the Roto-Pro instrument, while the ultrasonic curette and the diamond left the most uneven surfaces. A SEM roughness index (SRI) based on defined criteria, corresponded well with the results from the profilometer measurements, except that using this index the diamond scored higher than the ultrasonic curette. This was probably due to considerable calculus remnants remaining in the ultrasonic specimens. Characteristic features of the root surface morphology of the cleaned teeth are described. It is concluded that the combined use of microroughness measurements and SEM is of considerable value in this type of studies since more information may be obtained than by any of these methods used separately.

In vitro evaluation of surface roughness, adhesion of periodontal ligament fibroblasts, and Streptococcus gordonii following root instrumentation with Gracey curettes and subsequent polishing with diamond-coated curettes

“…Only one study reported about higher Ra values after using a hand curette in comparison to an ultrasonic system or Er:YAG laser [16]. As already described by others [14,15], a smear layer after using Gracey curettes was always visible in the SEM photographs. In the present study, the smear layer was clearly reduced following the additional by use of the diamond-coated curette.…”

“…Moreover, it appears that the observations made 30 years ago which have indicated that ultrasonic and rotating diamond instruments produced more uneven surfaces than hand curettes [14] are still valid today. It has been shown that after ultrasonic instrumentation, the surfaces appeared irregular and had grooves [15], and they were rougher compared to the surfaces obtained following the use of a curette [7].…”

Subgingival instrumentation to remove simulated plaque in vitro: influence of operators’ experience and type of instrument

“…To do so, scaling is performed using hand [7,8], ultrasonic [7,9,10] or sonic instruments [11,12]. Whilst hand instrumentation is both challenging and time-consuming but allows direct tactile control [13], power-driven instruments are easier to use and sometimes require less time than hand instruments to successfully debride root surfaces [14]. It is speculated that especially less experienced operators might not be sufficiently successful in removing subgingival plaque or calculus when using hand instruments, whilst inducing damages on the root surfaces with these instruments [15].…”

Removal of simulated biofilm: a preclinical ergonomic comparison of instruments and operators

“…Whilst being technically challenging and time demanding, an effective root surface instrumentation during supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) with hand instruments allows excellent direct tactile control and assessment of the treatment and its results [1,2]. In contrast, power-driven instruments, which are rather blunt and use acceleration of the vibrating tip to disrupt the plaque [3], seem easier to use which might explain why practitioners increasingly prefer power-driven over hand instruments [4,5].…”