We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants



Forgotten password?


Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 30 (2015), No. 2     26. Mar. 2015
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 30 (2015), No. 2  (26.03.2015)

Page 299-307, doi:10.11607/jomi.3703, PubMed:25506643

Assessment of the Effect of Chemical Agents Used in Dentistry on the Removal of Porphyromonas gingivalis and Escherichia coli from Sandblasted Acid-Etched Titanium Dental Implants: An In Vitro Study
Ferreira, Cimara Fortes / Babu, Jegdish / Tipton, David / Hottel, Timothy Lee
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the capability of chemicals to decontaminate Escherichia coli (E coli) or Porphyromonas gingivalis (P gingivalis) from sandblasted acid-etched (SAE) titanium dental implants.
Materials and Methods: SAE titanium dental implants were contaminated with E coli or P gingivalis and incubated in a sterile bacterial culture media under aerobic and anaerobic conditions, respectively. The implants were treated with 10 different conditions: calcium hydroxide [Ca(OH)2] paste for 1 minute and saline irrigation for 1 minute; Ca(OH)2 paste for 1 minute and 0.2% chlorhexidine digluconate (CHXD) irrigation for 1 minute; 0.2% CHXD for 1 minute; Dakin's solution for 1 minute; tetracycline hydrochloride (T-HCl) as a 1 g per 20 mL solution for 1, 2, and 3 minutes; and T-HCl paste for 1, 2, and 3 minutes. All implants were irrigated with 1 mL of saline solution and incubated under aerobic and anerobic conditions for 24 hours or 48 hours for E coli- and P gingivalis-contaminated implants, respectively. The control group was submitted to all procedures except for the chemical treatments. Aliquots were removed, and turbidity was measured by spectrophotometry. The level of bacterial growth in control cultures was considered to have a decontamination percentage (DC%) of 0.
Results: Spectrophotometric analysis showed that all chemical treatments resulted in significantly higher DC% compared to controls for SAE implants contaminated with E coli (P < .05) or P gingivalis (P < .05). For the P gingivalis experiments, SAE implants treated with Ca(OH)2 paste and saline solution had a lower DC% (39.3%) than those in the other treatment groups. In the E coli experiments, DC% was significantly lower for SAE implants treated with Ca(HO)2 paste and saline solution (48.7%), Dakin's solution (92.7%), or T-HCl paste for 1 minute (96.6%) than those in the other groups.
Conclusion: The DC% of SAE implants contaminated with E coli or P gingivalis by means of chemicals commonly used in dentistry is high, with the exception of Ca(OH)2 paste burnished for 1 minute and then irrigated with saline solution for 1 minute.

Keywords: calcium hydroxide, Dakin's solution, dental implants, Porphyromonas gingivalis, sandblasted acid-etched, tetracycline hydrochloride