The effects of polishing methods on surface morphology, roughness and bacterial colonisation of titanium abutments

被引:74
作者
Barbour, Michele E. [1 ]
O'Sullivan, Dominic J. [1 ]
Jenkinson, Howard F. [1 ]
Jagger, Daryll C. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Bristol, Dept Oral & Dent Sci, Bristol BS1 2LY, Avon, England
关键词
D O I
10.1007/s10856-007-0141-2
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
Bacterial colonisation of exposed implant and abutment surfaces can lead to peri-implantitis, a common cause of oral implant failure. When an abutment becomes exposed in the oral environment the typical recommendation is to debride it, to obtain a smoother surface which might be expected to reduce bacterial colonisation. The aim of this study was to evaluate, in vitro, a conventional polishing protocol (PP1) and a simplified polishing protocol (PP2), suggested to have advantages over PP1. The surface morphology and roughness of titanium abutments were characterised at each stage of polishing, and adhesion of oral bacteria was evaluated, using atomic force microscopy, environmental scanning electron microscopy and optical profilometry. PP1 and PP2 methodologies resulted in indistinguishable surface finishes, with fewer scratches than the unmodified surface, and equal roughness values. PP2 resulted in less disruption and less removal of surface material. Early biofilm formation by Streptococcus mutans was reduced on surfaces polished using PP2, but not PP1. Biofilms of Actinomyces naeslundii were more extensive on polished abutment surfaces. Simplified protocol PP2 may be preferable to conventional protocol PP1, since less material is removed, and there is less chance of rough areas remaining. Polishing, however, does not necessarily reduce oral bacterial colonisation.
引用
收藏
页码:1439 / 1447
页数:9
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]   Surface treatments and roughness properties of Ti-based biomaterials [J].
Bagno, A ;
Di Bello, C .
JOURNAL OF MATERIALS SCIENCE-MATERIALS IN MEDICINE, 2004, 15 (09) :935-949
[2]   The influence of abutment surface roughness on plaque accumulation and peri-implant mucositis [J].
Bollen, CML ;
Papaioanno, W ;
VanEldere, J ;
Schepers, E ;
Quirynen, M ;
vanSteenberghe, D .
CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 1996, 7 (03) :201-211
[3]   Electron microscopic detection of salivary α-amylase in the pellicle formed in situ [J].
Deimling, D ;
Breschi, L ;
Hoth-Hannig, W ;
Ruggeri, A ;
Hannig, C ;
Nekrashevych, Y ;
Prati, C ;
Hannig, M .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORAL SCIENCES, 2004, 112 (06) :503-509
[4]  
Del Fabbro M, 2004, INT J PERIODONT REST, V24, P565
[5]  
Drake DR, 1999, INT J ORAL MAX IMPL, V14, P226
[6]  
Edgerton M, 1996, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, V11, P443
[7]   Effect of hydrophobicity on in vitro streptococcal adhesion to dental alloys [J].
Grivet, M ;
Morrier, JJ ;
Benay, G ;
Barsotti, O .
JOURNAL OF MATERIALS SCIENCE-MATERIALS IN MEDICINE, 2000, 11 (10) :637-642
[8]  
Hallmon W W, 1996, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, V11, P96
[9]   Staphylococcus aureus adhesion to different treated titanium surfaces [J].
Harris, LG ;
Richards, RG .
JOURNAL OF MATERIALS SCIENCE-MATERIALS IN MEDICINE, 2004, 15 (04) :311-314
[10]  
Heitz-Mayfield LJA, 2004, INT J ORAL MAX IMPL, V19, P128