Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract To compare the dental implant surface properties such as mean surface roughness, roughness depth, and the surface loss produced by different prophylactic instrument types. Twenty-four surfaces of twelve dental implants were treated using titanium curettes, titanium-coated curettes, an air abrasion unit, and titanium brushes. The dental implants were inserted partially into a Styrofoam base, exposing one-third to simulate cases of peri-implantitis. The exposed surface was coated with artificial dental calculus (ADC) and divided into four groups for treatment. The arithmetic mean surface roughness ( R a) and the mean roughness depth ( R z) were assessed using the confocal microscope, and the surface loss (SL) area was calculated from the scanning electron microscopic images using an image analysis software. The Ra value varied between 1.08 to 0.29 µm, the Rz value between 10.3 to 70.5 µm, and the mean surface loss area between 154 to 9410 µm 2 . The One-way ANOVA analysis showed a statistically significant difference between the four groups (P < 0.05). The air abrasion unit showed the highest mean roughness value of 1.08 ± 0.14 µm, mean roughness depth of 70.5 ± 2.21 µm, and a minor surface area loss of 154 ± 132 µm 2 . In comparison, the titanium brushes showed the least Ra and Rz of 0.29 ± 0.05 µm and 10.3 ± 2.32 µm, respectively, whereas the titanium-coated curettes showed the highest loss of surface area 9410 ± 91.6 µm 2 . The air abrasion unit was shown to have the least detrimental effect on the implant surface when removing the artificial dental calculus compared to the other three methods.
Kumar et al. (Mon,) studied this question.