Numerous chemical and physical surface decontamination methods are used in clinical practice for implant surface decontamination, which constitutes the most critical step in the management of peri-implantitis. The aim of this study was to compare, in vitro, the efficacy of the electrolytic cleaning device GalvoSurge (GalvoSurge, GalvoSurge Dental AG, Widnau, Switzerland) with that of an air-abrasive AIRFLOW unit (AIRFLOW, Master PiezonVR, EMS Electro Medical Systems, Herrliberg, Switzerland). Thirty-two SLA-surfaced dental implants were allocated to two groups (n = 16) and contaminated with permanent ink, after which they were placed into jaw models representing two different defect configurations. After treatment, implants were photographed and, using ImageJ, the residual stain area/percentage within a 4 mm region apical to the implant neck was calculated. Surface topography was further evaluated by SEM and EDS. In the two-way analysis of variance, the effect of the decontamination method was statistically significant. The GalvoSurge group exhibited a lower residual stain percentage than AIRFLOW (overall 28.47 ± 10.13 vs. 37.14 ± 9.60; p = 0.019). This difference was independent of defect type (p > 0.05). These findings indicate that electrochemical cleaning via galvanic current may be more effective, under in vitro conditions, for stain removal and surface decontamination; however, they also demonstrate that residual contamination could not be completely eliminated irrespective of the method.
Özay et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: