The Effect of Er,Cr:YSGG and Diode Laser Applications on Dental Implant Surfaces Contaminated with Acinetobacter Baumannii and Pseudomonas Aeruginosa.

Adel S Alagl,Marwa Madi,Sumit Bedi,Zainab S Al-Aql,Faisal Al Onaizan

doi:10.3390/ma12132073

Adel S Alagl, Marwa Madi + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12132073

Copy DOI

Abstract

Treatment of peri-implantitis through several implant surface decontamination techniques have been reported, however, some of them can negatively alter the implant surface or enhance more bacterial resistance. The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate implant surface decontamination by means of Er,Cr:YSGG and diode lasers. Fifty micro-textured (MTX) dental implants were contaminated with Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 25) and with Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 25). All implants were then divided into five groups for the decontamination procedure. In group I (GI), decontamination was done with an Er,Cr:YSGG laser (2780 nm), while in group II (GII) decontamination was performed using photodynamic therapy (a 650 nm diode laser). In Group III (GIII) decontamination was performed with photodynamic therapy (an 808 nm diode laser), and in group IV (GIV) decontamination was performed with 0.12% chlorhexidine. Group V (GV) was the control group with no decontamination. After decontamination, colony forming units (CFU) were counted and implants were prepared for SEM analysis. A significant difference (p < 0.001) was observed for GI compared to the other groups, and also for GIV compared to both GII and GIII. The Er,Cr:YSGG laser (GI) showed the best results in decontaminating the implant surface. Chlorhexidine (GIV), proved to be better in decontaminating the implant surface than photodynamic therapy GII and diode laser GIII. No significant difference was found between group GII and GIII. The SEM analysis showed no significant change in the implant surface topography. The results of this study suggest that the Er,Cr:YSGG laser can be considered as an effective technique for reducing bacteria contamination on implant surfaces.

Highlights

Peri-implantitis continues to pose a serious challenge to the success of osseointegration of dental implants
The goals to be achieved during the surgical stage of implant treatment include plaque elimination, implant surface decontamination, tissue rejuvenation, and preservation of a healthy post-operative oral environment [2]
The treatment with group I (GI) (Er, Cr:YSGG) showed a significantly fewer viable cells compared to other treatment groups, as well as the untreated group (p < 0.0001, Table 2, Figures 3 and 4)

Summary

Introduction

Treatment of peri-implantitis through several implant surface decontamination techniques have been reported, some of them can negatively alter the implant surface or enhance more bacterial resistance. The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate implant surface decontamination by means of Er,Cr:YSGG and diode lasers. In Group III (GIII) decontamination was performed with photodynamic therapy (an 808 nm diode laser), and in group IV (GIV) decontamination was performed with 0.12% chlorhexidine. Chlorhexidine (GIV), proved to be better in decontaminating the implant surface than photodynamic therapy GII and diode laser GIII.

Objectives

Discussion

Conclusion