Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 31 (2016), No. 4 22. July 2016
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 31 (2016), No. 4 (22.07.2016)
Page 799-806, doi:10.11607/jomi.4440, PubMed:27447145
Cell Attachment Following Instrumentation with Titanium and Plastic Instruments, Diode Laser, and Titanium Brush on Titanium, Titanium-Zirconium, and Zirconia Surfaces
Lang, Melissa S. / Cerutis, D. Roselyn / Miyamoto, Takanari / Nunn, Martha E.
Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the surface characteristics and gingival fibroblast adhesion of disks composed of implant and abutment materials following brief and repeated instrumentation with instruments commonly used in procedures for implant maintenance, stage-two implant surgery, and periimplantitis treatment.
Materials and Methods: One hundred twenty disks (40 titanium, 40 titaniumzirconium, 40 zirconia) were grouped into treatment categories of instrumentation by plastic curette, titanium curette, diode microlaser, rotary titanium brush, and no treatment. Twenty strokes were applied to half of the disks in the plastic and titanium curette treatment categories, while half of the disks received 100 strokes each to simulate implant maintenance occurring on a repetitive basis. Following analysis of the disks by optical laser profilometry, disks were cultured with human gingival fibroblasts. Cell counts were conducted from scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images.
Results: Differences in surface roughness across all instruments tested for zirconia disks were negligible, while both titanium disks and titaniumzirconium disks showed large differences in surface roughness across the spectrum of instruments tested. The rotary titanium brush and the titanium curette yielded the greatest overall mean surface roughness, while the plastic curette yielded the lowest mean surface roughness. The greatest mean cell counts for each disk type were as follows: titanium disks with plastic curettes, titanium-zirconium disks with titanium curettes, and zirconia disks with the diode microlaser.
Conclusion: Repeated instrumentation did not result in cumulative changes in surface roughness of implant materials made of titanium, titanium-zirconium, or zirconia. Instrumentation with plastic implant curettes on titanium and zirconia surfaces appeared to be more favorable than titanium implant curettes in terms of gingival fibroblast attachment on these surfaces.
Keywords: cell attachment, dental implants, fibroblasts, maintenance, surface roughness, titanium