Effects of ultrasonic scaler tips and toothbrush on titanium disc surfaces evaluated with confocal microscopy

Journal of Craniofacial Surgery

Volumn 23, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 1552-1558

  Park, Jun Beom ^a   Kim, Namryang ^a   Ko, Youngkyung ^a  

^a The Catholic University of Korea   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Brushing; Confocal microscope; Dental implant; Machined; Profilometry; Sandblasted acid etched; Surface roughness; Ultrasonic scaler

Indexed keywords

TITANIUM; TOOTHPASTE;

ARTICLE; CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONFOCAL MICROSCOPY; DENTAL ACID ETCHING; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; INSTRUMENTATION; PREVENTIVE DENTISTRY; SURFACE PROPERTY; TOOTH BRUSHING; TOOTH IMPLANT; TOOTH PLAQUE; ULTRASOUND;

ACID ETCHING, DENTAL; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; DENTAL IMPLANTS; DENTAL PLAQUE; DENTAL SCALING; DENTIFRICES; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; MICROSCOPY, CONFOCAL; SURFACE PROPERTIES; TITANIUM; TOOTHBRUSHING; ULTRASONICS;

EID: 84867817389     PISSN: 10492275     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e31825e3ba6     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Hossain A, Okawa S, Miyakawa O. Surface texture and composition of titanium brushed with toothpaste slurries of different pHs. Dent Mater 2007;23:186-192
2. Duarte PM, Reis AF, de Freitas PM, et al. Bacterial adhesion on smooth and rough titanium surfaces after treatment with different instruments. J Periodontol 2009;80:1824-1832
3. Li D, Ferguson SJ, Beutler T, et al. Biomechanical comparison of the sandblasted and acid-etched and the machined and acid-etched titanium surface for dental implants. J Biomed Mater Res 2002;60:325-332
4. Att W, Kubo K, Yamada M, et al. Biomechanical properties of jaw periosteum-derived mineralized culture on different titanium topography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:831-841
5. Att W, Yamada M, Ogawa T. Effect of titanium surface characteristics on the behavior and function of oral fibroblasts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:419-431
6. Keller JC, Schneider GB, Stanford CM, et al. Effects of implant microtopography on osteoblast cell attachment. Implant Dent 2003;12:175-181
7. Masaki C, Schneider GB, Zaharias R, et al. Effects of implant surface microtopography on osteoblast gene expression. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:650-656
8. Lincks J, Boyan BD, Blanchard CR, et al. Response of MG63 osteoblast-like cells to titanium and titanium alloy is dependent on surface roughness and composition. Biomaterials 1998;19:2219-2232
9. Gahlert M, Gudehus T, Eichhorn S, et al. Biomechanical and histomorphometric comparison between zirconia implants with varying surface textures and a titanium implant in the maxilla of miniature pigs. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007;18:662-668
10. Fan Z, Jia S, Su JS. Influence of surface roughness of titanium implant on core binding factor alpha 1 subunit of osteoblasts. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2010;45:466-470
11. Ferguson SJ, Langhoff JD, Voelter K, et al. Biomechanical comparison of different surface modifications for dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23:1037-1046
12. Kang SH, Cho SA. Comparison of removal torques for laser-treated titanium implants with anodized implants. J Craniofac Surg 2011;22:1491-1495
13. Brookshire FV, Nagy WW, Dhuru VB, et al. The qualitative effects of various types of hygiene instrumentation on commercially pure titanium and titanium alloy implant abutments: an in vitro and scanning electron microscope study. J Prosthet Dent 1997;78:286-294
14. Drisko CL, Cochran DL, Blieden T, et al. Position paper: sonic and ultrasonic scalers in periodontics. Research, Science and Therapy Committee of the American Academy of Periodontology. J Periodontol 2000;71:1792-1801
15. Takasaki AA, Aoki A, Mizutani K, et al. Er:YAG laser therapy for peri-implant infection: a histological study. Lasers Med Sci 2007;22:143-157
16. Hossain A, Okawa S, Miyakawa O. Effect of toothbrushing on titanium surface: an approach to understanding surface properties of brushed titanium. Dent Mater 2006;22:346-352
17. Jarmar T, Palmquist A, Branemark R, et al. Characterization of the surface properties of commercially available dental implants using scanning electron microscopy, focused ion beam, and high-resolution transmission electron microscopy. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2008;10:11-22
18. Boyan BD, Lincks J, Lohmann CH, et al. Effect of surface roughness and composition on costochondral chondrocytes is dependent on cell maturation state. J Orthop Res 1999;17:446-457
19. Rapley JW, Swan RH, Hallmon WW, et al. The surface characteristics produced by various oral hygiene instruments and materials on titanium implant abutments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5:47-52
20. Hallmon WW, Waldrop TC, Meffert RM, et al. A comparative study of the effects of metallic, nonmetallic, and sonic instrumentation on titanium abutment surfaces. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:96-100
21. Sato S, Kishida M, Ito K. The comparative effect of ultrasonic scalers on titanium surfaces: an in vitro study. J Periodontol 2004;75:1269-1273
22. Evans AR, Harper IS, Sanson GD. Confocal imaging, visualization and 3-D surface measurement of small mammalian teeth. J Microsc 2001;204:108-118
23. Howell K, Hopkins N, McLoughlin P. Combined confocal microscopy and stereology: a highly efficient and unbiased approach to quantitative structural measurement in tissues. Exp Physiol 2002;87:747-756
24. Watson TF, Pagliari D, Sidhu SK, et al. Confocal microscopic observation of structural changes in glass-ionomer cements and tooth interfaces. Biomaterials 1998;19:581-588
25. Watson TF. A confocal optical microscope study of the morphology of the tooth/restoration interface using Scotchbond 2 dentin adhesive. J Dent Res 1989;68:1124-1131
26. Stubinger S, Etter C, Miskiewicz M, et al. Surface alterations of polished and sandblasted and acid-etched titanium implants after Er:YAG, carbon dioxide, and diode laser irradiation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010;25:104-111
27. Ramaglia L, di Lauro AE, Morgese F, et al. Profilometric and standard error of the mean analysis of rough implant surfaces treated with different instrumentations. Implant Dent 2006;15:77-82
28. Bain CA. An in vitro and in vivo evaluation of various implant-cleaning instruments. Quintessence Int 1998;29:423-427
29. Johannsen G, Redmalm G, Ryden H. Surface changes on dental materials. II. The influence of two different dentifrices on surface roughness measured by laser reflexion and profilometer techniques. Swed Dent J 1992;16:13-20
30. Siirila HS, Kononen M. The effect of oral topical fluorides on the surface of commercially pure titanium. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:50-54
31. Johannsen G, Redmalm G, Ryden H. Surface changes on dental materials. The influence of two different dentifrices on surface roughness measured by laser reflexion and profilometer techniques. Swed Dent J 1989;13:267-276
32. Speelman JA, Collaert B, Klinge B. Evaluation of different methods to clean titanium abutments. A scanning electron microscopic study. Clin Oral Implants Res 1992;3:120-127
33. Dohan Ehrenfest DM, Coelho PG, Kang BS, et al. Classification of osseointegrated implant surfaces: materials, chemistry and topography. Trends Biotechnol 2010;28:198-206
34. Ahmad M, Gawronski D, Blum J, et al. Differential response of human osteoblast-like cells to commercially pure (CP) titanium grades 1 and 4. J Biomed Mater Res 1999;46:121-131
35. Nielsen HS. The effects of calibration in surface roughness measurements. Measurement 1999;9:111-114
36. Demircioglu P, Durakbasa MN. Investigations on machined metal surfaces through the stylus type and optical 3D instruments and their mathematical modeling with the help of statistical techniques. Measurement 2011;44:611-619
37. Wennerberg A, Albrektsson T. On implant surfaces: a review of current knowledge and opinions. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010;25:63-74
38. Whitehouse D. Surface characterization and roughness measurement in engineering. In: Rastogi P, ed. Photomechanics. vol. 77: Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer, 2000:413-461.
39. Tudose IV, Horváth P, Suchea M, et al. Correlation of ZnO thin film surface properties with conductivity. Appl Physics A Mater Sci Proc 2007;89:57-61
40. Wu-Yuan CD, Eganhouse KJ, Keller JC, et al. Oral bacterial attachment to titanium surfaces: a scanning electron microscopy study. J Oral Implantol 1995;21:207-213
41. Burgers R, Gerlach T, Hahnel S, et al. In vivo and in vitro biofilm formation on two different titanium implant surfaces. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010;21:156-164
42. Buser D, Nydegger T, Oxland T, et al. Interface shear strength of titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: a biomechanical study in the maxilla of miniature pigs. J Biomed Mater Res 1999;45:75-83
43. Zhao G, Raines AL, Wieland M, et al. Requirement for both micron-and submicron scale structure for synergistic responses of osteoblasts to substrate surface energy and topography. Biomaterials 2007;28:2821-2829
44. 3. J Biomed Mater Res 1998;39:77-85
45. 3 is mediated via protein kinase CY and protein kinase AYdependent pathways. Biomaterials 2001;22:731-741
46. Wieland M, Textor M, Chehroudi B, et al. Synergistic interaction of topographic features in the production of bone-like nodules on Ti surfaces by rat osteoblasts. Biomaterials 2005;26:1119-1130
47. Homiak AW, Cook PA, DeBoer J. Effect of hygiene instrumentation on titanium abutments: a scanning electron microscopy study. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67:364-369