Treatment of Peri-implantitis Around TiUnite-Surface Implants Using Er:YAG Laser Microexplosions

Yamamoto, Atsuhiko; Tanabe, Toshiichiro

doi:10.11607/prd.1593

Cited by 40 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 13 publications

(13 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…At this power setting with water spray, the maximum the implant surface was heated was 3 Celsius degrees, whereas without water spray the temperature increased by 30-33 Celsius degrees. Also, when the authors performed the same protocol with a CO 2 laser with air cooling, the implant surfaces were heated by 50 Celsius degrees [62]. An in vivo study by Schwarz et al (2005) in humans analyzed treatment of peri-implant defects in twenty patients with 40 contaminated implants.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detoxification of Implant Surfaces Affected by Peri-Implant Disease: An Overview of Non-surgical Methods

Valderrama¹,

Blansett²,

Gonzalez³

et al. 2014

TODENTJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of this review is to summarize the findings of studies that have evaluated non-surgical approaches for detoxification of implant body surfaces in vitro and in vivo, and to evaluate clinical trials on the use of these methodologies for treating peri-implant disease.Materials and methods: A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE (Pubmed) from 1966 to 2013. In vitro and in vivo studies as well as clinical trials on non-surgical therapy were evaluated. The outcome variables were the ability of the therapeutic method to eliminate the biofilm and endotoxins from the implant surface, the changes in clinical parameters including probing depth, clinical attachment levels, bleeding on probing; radiographic bone fill and histological re-osseointegration. Results: From 134 articles found 35 were analyzed. The findings, advantages and disadvantages of using lasers as well as mechanical and chemical methods are discussed. Most of the in vivo and human studies used combination therapies which makes determining the efficacy of one specific method difficult. Most human studies are case series with short term longitudinal analysis without survival or failure reports. Conclusion: Complete elimination of the biofilms is difficult to achieve using these approaches. All therapies induce changes of the chemical and physical properties of the implant surface. Re-osseointegration may be difficult to achieve if not impossible without surgical access to ensure thorough debridement of the defect and detoxification of the implant surface. Combination protocols for non-surgical treatment of peri-implantitis in humans have shown some positive clinical results but long-term evaluation to evaluate the validity and reliability of the techniques is needed.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detoxification of Implant Surfaces Affected by Peri-Implant Disease: An Overview of Non-surgical Methods

Valderrama¹,

Blansett²,

Gonzalez³

et al. 2014

TODENTJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to the investigators, the use of water irrigation was able to prevent overheating of the implant protecting the surrounding bone [68]. However, an in vitro study with the Er:YAG found that SLA titanium discs showed alterations after 10 sec of irradiation at 300 mJ/10 Hz characterized by melting down of peaks.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detoxification of Implant Surfaces Affected by Peri-Implant Disease: An Overview of Surgical Methods

Valderrama

Wilson²

2013

International Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose. Peri-implantitis is one of the major causes of implant failure. The detoxification of the implant surface is necessary to obtain reosseointegration. The aim of this review was to summarize in vitro and in vivo studies as well as clinical trials that have evaluated surgical approaches for detoxification of the implant body surfaces. Materials and Methods. A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE (PubMed) from 1966 to 2013. The outcome variables were the ability of the therapeutic method to eliminate the biofilm and endotoxins from the implant surface, the changes in clinical parameters, radiographic bone fill, and histological reosseointegration. Results. From 574 articles found, 76 were analyzed. The findings, advantages, and disadvantages of using mechanical, chemical methods and lasers are discussed. Conclusions. Complete elimination of the biofilms is difficult to achieve. All therapies induce changes of the chemical and physical properties of the implant surface. Partial reosseointegration after detoxification has been reported in animals. Combination protocols for surgical treatment of peri-implantitis in humans have shown some positive clinical and radiographic results, but long-term evaluation to evaluate the validity and reliability of the techniques is needed.

show abstract

“…Although positive effects have been reported in terms of decontamination, debridement and removal of bacterial plaque and calcified deposits from the implant surface, there exists a risk of thermal side effects [172,173] and extensive microstructural alteration of the implant material may affect stimulatory cellular responses and any further potential for osseointegration [174,175]. There exists limited data on the clinical effectiveness of high power laser therapy, however, several studies support its use and claim at least similar results compared with mechanical methods, e.g.…”

Section: Laser Therapy Photodynamic Therapy and Photobiomodulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bacterial adhesion mechanisms on dental implant surfaces and the influencing factors

Han

Tsoi

Rodrigues

et al. 2016

International Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tBacterial adhesion on dental implants may cause peri-implant disease including peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis. Peri-implantitis may lead to bone resorption and eventually loss of the implant. Therefore, the factors which influence bacterial adhesion are critical and revealed by many studies. The purpose of this review is to summarize the current knowledge of factors influencing the bacteria adhesion, including local factors of implant surface topography, abutment, cement and oral environment factors of saliva and protein. In addition, the corresponding strategies of surface modifications, coatings and challenges for implant materials as prevention and treatment approaches for bacteria adhesion on implant will also be discussed. We expect to give an overall picture of the bacteria adhesion on implant, and provide future perspectives, such as laser therapy, photocatalysis, plasma and bioelectric effect to inspire researchers to explore on this issue.

show abstract

Treatment of Peri-implantitis Around TiUnite-Surface Implants Using Er:YAG Laser Microexplosions

Cited by 40 publications

References 13 publications

Detoxification of Implant Surfaces Affected by Peri-Implant Disease: An Overview of Non-surgical Methods

Detoxification of Implant Surfaces Affected by Peri-Implant Disease: An Overview of Non-surgical Methods

Detoxification of Implant Surfaces Affected by Peri-Implant Disease: An Overview of Surgical Methods

Bacterial adhesion mechanisms on dental implant surfaces and the influencing factors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About