In Vitro Evaluation of Root Surface Roughness in The Use of an Ultrasonic Device with Different Tips Having Different Mechanism of Action: A Profilometric Study
Results: There were no statistical differences between the initial roughness values of the groups (p
📌 3 Key Takeaways
🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of this study was the profilometric evaluation of the changes in root surface roughness created by different types of ultrasonic tips and mechanism of action.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: Thirty root dentine samples obtained from 15 maxillary premolars, extracted for orthodontic reasons, were included in the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: There were no statistical differences between the initial roughness values of the groups (p
Objective: The aim of this study was the profilometric evaluation of the changes in root surface roughness created by different types of ultrasonic tips and mechanism of action. Methods: Thirty root dentine samples obtained from 15 maxillary premolars, extracted for orthodontic reasons, were included in the study. The sample surfaces were embedded into acrylic blocks, polished, and divided into 3 study groups as linear oscillating device (LOD) with straight tip (ST); LOD with perio-curette tip (PCT); conventional ultrasonic scaler tip (CUST). A calibrated clinician instrumented all surfaces in each group. The root surfaces were evaluated before and after instrumentations with a profilometer device. Results: There were no statistical differences between the initial roughness values of the groups (p
KARACA, E. Ö., TUNAR, O. L. (2022). In Vitro Evaluation of Root Surface Roughness in The Use of an Ultrasonic Device with Different Tips Having Different Mechanism of Action: A Profilometric Study. Clinical and Experimental Health Sciences, Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 2, 310–314. https://ajindex.com/articles/481101
Kishida M, Sato S, Ito K. Comparison of the effects of various periodontal rotary instruments on surface characteristics of root surface. J Oral Sci 2004;46(1):1-8
O’Leary TJ. The impact of research on scaling and root planing. J Periodontol 1986;57(2):69-75
Lindhe J, Westfelt E, Nyman S, Socransky SS, Heijl L, Bratthall G. Healing following surgical/non-surgical treatment of periodontal disease. A clinical study. J Clin Periodontol 1982;9(2):115-128
Chan YK, Needleman IG, Clifford LR. Comparison of four methods of assessing root surface debridement. J Periodontol 2000;71(3):385-393
Santos FA, Pochapski MT, Leal PC, Gimenes-Sakima PP, Marcantonio E, Jr. Comparative study on the effect of ultrasonic instruments on the root surface in vivo. Clin Oral Investig 2008;12(2):143-150
Dwivedi S, Verma SJ. Comparison of the effects of periodontal rotary instruments and Gracey curettes on root surface characteristics: an in vivo SEM study. Quintessence Int 2012;43(10):e135-140
Krishna R, De Stefano JA. Ultrasonic vs. hand instrumentation in periodontal therapy: clinical outcomes. Periodontol 2000 2016;71(1):113-127
Kawashima H, Sato S, Kishida M, Ito K. A comparison of root surface instrumentation using two piezoelectric ultrasonic scalers and a hand scaler in vivo. J Periodontal Res 2007;42(1):90-95
Jepsen S, Ayna M, Hedderich J, Eberhard J. Significant influence of scaler tip design on root substance loss resulting from ultrasonic scaling: a laserprofilometric in vitro study. J Clin Periodontol 2004;31(11):1003-1006
Dragoo MR. A clinical evaluation of hand and ultrasonic instruments on subgingival debridement
With unmodified and modified ultrasonic inserts. Int J Periodontal Res 1992;12(4):310-323
Flemmig TF, Petersilka GJ, Mehl A, Hickel R, Klaiber B. Working parameters of a magnetostrictive ultrasonic scaler influencing root substance removal in vitro. J Periodontol. 1998;69(5):547- 553
Marda P, Prakash S, Devaraj CG, Vastardis S. A comparison of root surface instrumentation using manual, ultrasonic and rotary instruments: an in vitro study using scanning electron microscopy. Indian J Dent Res 2012;23(2):164-170
Silva D, Martins O, Matos S, Lopes P, Rolo T, Baptista I. Histological and profilometric evaluation of the root surface after instrumentation with a new piezoelectric device–ex vivo study. Int J Dent Hyg 2015;13(2):138-144
Claffey N, Polyzois I, Ziaka P. An overview of nonsurgic