- Austria / Österreich
- Bosnia and Herzegovina / Босна и Херцеговина
- Bulgaria / България
- Croatia / Hrvatska
- Czech Republic & Slovakia / Česká republika & Slovensko
- Finland / Suomi
- France / France
- Germany / Deutschland
- Greece / ΕΛΛΑΔΑ
- Italy / Italia
- Netherlands / Nederland
- Nordic / Nordic
- Poland / Polska
- Portugal / Portugal
- Romania & Moldova / România & Moldova
- Slovenia / Slovenija
- Serbia & Montenegro / Србија и Црна Гора
- Spain / España
- Switzerland / Schweiz
- Turkey / Türkiye
- UK & Ireland / UK & Ireland
To assess the usability of pig jaws periodontal treatment model for low abrasive air polishing and to histologically gauge the effect of various instrumentation techniques.
Material and methods
- From 120 Pig mandibles, the buccal part of one molar was chosen randomly and fixed in a way allowing controlled instrumentation.
- Four modes of instrumentation were evaluated.
Group A: Low Abrasive airpolishing using glycine of 25 μm (EMS Perio Powder, EMS, Nyon, Switzerland).
Group B: Low Abrasive airpolishing using erythritol powder of 14 μm EMS PLUS Powder, EMS, Nyon, Switzerland).
- EMS Air Flow Master was used with a standard handpiece at a distance of 5mm to the gingival tissue in a continuously sweeping way for 5 s like subgingival biofilm removal
Group C: Piezoceramic scaling using Perio Slim PS instrument (EMS)
- EMS Piezon Master was used at medium power and water setting
- The instrument was kept parallel to the root surface at a pressure of approx. 1 N for 10 s
Group D: 7/8 Gracey Curette (Deppeler, Rolle, Switzerland)
- Five strokes of curette applied with a pressure of approximately 3 N
Group E: Untreated biopsy samples served as negative control
- Following instrumentation, the soft tissue alongside the tooth was removed and graded.
1 - No lesion: undamaged epithelium and connective tissue
2 - Minor lesion: disruption of superficial epithelial layers, undamaged basal membrane
3 - Medium lesion: superficial layers of the epithelium removed, basal membrane partially damaged
4 - Severe lesion: epithelium and basal membrane completely removed, connective tissue exposed
Results
- Hand instrumentation had the most pronounced damage
- Hand instrumentation and ultrasonic scaling caused higher tissue destruction than both airpolishing powders
- Ultrasonics was slightly less traumatic than hand instrumentation with no statistically significant difference
- Between the low abrasive airpolishing powders, glycine showed slightly lesser destruction, however, no statistically significant difference was observed between glycine and erythritol
- The porcine model is apt for use in histological evaluation
Conclusion
- Pig jaws could be used to assess the histological effects of different instrumentations on periodontal tissues before conducting studies on humans
- Low abrasive airpolishing powders had an overall low potential of soft tissue damage and could be used safely to remove biofilm subgingivally.
Fri. 5 April 2024
12:00 am UAE (Dubai)
Reimagining success with ClearCorrect: From case planning to practice growth
Tue. 9 April 2024
9:00 pm UAE (Dubai)
Soluzioni innovative per sostenere l’evoluzione dello studio: Lo strumento giusto può fare la differenza
Wed. 10 April 2024
3:00 am UAE (Dubai)
ITI US section live treatment planning session
Wed. 10 April 2024
1:00 pm UAE (Dubai)
A tooth is extracted—what now? Is there any benefit to ridge augmentation?
Thu. 11 April 2024
4:00 am UAE (Dubai)
Santa Fe Group Medicare Update
Thu. 11 April 2024
11:30 am UAE (Dubai)
Por qué implementar Invisalign Go en tu consulta?
Tue. 16 April 2024
12:00 am UAE (Dubai)