Supragingival Root Surface Removal during Maintenance Procedures Utilizing an Air‐Powder Abrasive System or Hand Scaling

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the amount of root surface removal in vitro using an air-powder abrasive system or sharp curet on root surfaces simulating the cumulative effects of an every 3-month periodontal maintenance regimen over a 3-year period and to compare the amount of time spent in the utilization of each instrument. Fifty extracted teeth with fully formed roots were cleaned and mounted in one of 10 different artificial alveolar arches. Each arch contained one central incisor, one lateral incisor, one canine, one first and one second premolar. The buccal and mesial tooth root diameters were measured initially and after each treatment with a digital point micrometer. All teeth were stained with coffee and repositioned in their artificial alveolae and treated by the air-powder abrasive system or curet until all visible stain was removed. Time required for removal of stain in both treatment groups was recorded. Both groups were restained, retreated, and retimed 12 times to reproduce a 3-month maintenance interval for 3 years. The average root structure removed by the air-powder abrasive system following each treatment was 10.68 micron while the curet removed an average of 27.09 micron. Stain was removed 3.15 times faster by the air-powder abrasive system than with a curet.

Effects of an air-powder polishing system on orthodontically bracketed and banded teeth

“…Of particular importance is the fact that the composite and cement were left intact even after 60 seconds' exposure to the air-powder-water spray. Confirmed projections by Atkinson 5 and Berkstein 21 estimate that 30 seconds of exposure time to the air-powder-water spray is the equivalent of a patient's being maintained on a 3-month recall for 15 years and receiving a 0.5-second blast from the polishing device at every visit. Certainly, no routine orthodontic treatment is carried out for 15 years; thus the 60-second exposure time is extreme.…”

A Comperative Evaluation of 3 Different Polishing Methods on Tooth Surface Roughness

“…In many study, it was shown that air-polishing devices became time-saving and effective in the application on normal enamel surface [19][20][21][22][23]. However, it does not generally lead to surface modification and loss of materials to be able to be detected clinically [23,24].…”

Comparison of two methods of dental prophylaxis: evaluation of arterial pressure and patient comfort in a clinical randomized controlled trial

“…Until 1980, the dentists performed dental prophylaxis using rubber cups and brushes with an abrasive low speed motor. With the emergence of a new method consisting of a spray comprised of powder sodium bicarbonate, water and air, dental prophylaxis became more rapid and efficient [1][2][3] . Sodium bicarbonate is a nontoxic, water soluble abrasive that is considered ideal for intra-oral use.…”

“…It has been used successfully in the removal of non-mineral stains caused by smoking, has been implemented indifferent components of dental implants and has been used safely in the cleaning of supragingival orthodontic devices 4,5 . However, it should be used with caution in areas of demineralized enamel because erosion of enamel prisms 6 may occur, resulting in the exposure of root surface dentin or significant substance removal 2,[7][8][9] , which is of particular interest in periodontal maintenance therapy because gingival recession is a common finding in postperiodontal treatment patients 10,11 . Sodium bicarbonate can so lead to substantial erosion or blunting of restorative materials, with the exception of ceramics, which seem to experience a less significant loss of substance 9,[12][13][14] .…”