Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of using a 445 nm laser on dental implants by comparing it with a laser with 970 nm wavelength. Two models, a pig mandible and glass ionomer cement, were used to evaluate the temperature increase in dental implants during laser irradiation with both wavelengths. Temperature was measured every second at four different places on the dental implants. Different power settings, effects of water cooling, distance of the laser fibre to the dental implant and continuous comparison to a pulsed laser beam were tested. Surface alterations on titanium discs after laser irradiation for 4 min at 2.0 W, were analysed in a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The maximum temperature and time to reach each of the thresholds were comparable between the 445 nm and 970 nm lasers. Neither the 445 nm nor the 970 nm wavelength showed any signs of surface alterations on the titanium discs. Using a 445 nm laser on dental implants is as safe as using a 970 nm laser, in terms of temperature increase and surface alterations. Applying a generous amount of cooling water and irradiating in short intervals is important when using lasers on dental implants.

Highlights

  • One of the great challenges in periodontology today and in the future is peri-implantitis, which is an inflammatory disease characterised by loss of the supporting peri-implant tissues [1]

  • This study focuses on bone growth in a canal in a titanium implant, but not the effect of temperature increase on osseointegration of a titanium implant

  • +20 °C reached were similar for both the quicker for the nm laser compared to the nm

Read more

Summary

Introduction

One of the great challenges in periodontology today and in the future is peri-implantitis, which is an inflammatory disease characterised by loss of the supporting peri-implant tissues [1]. (CI: 14–30%) in a meta-analysis [3], consisting of 11 studies from between 2005 and 2013. In a recent cross-sectional study [4] in a Spanish population, the prevalence was 24% (CI: 19–29%), which is in line with the previously mentioned meta-analysis [3]. Together these approximations imply that worldwide every year, 2.6–4.0 million patients are at risk of developing the disease [2,3]. The current treatment options of peri-implantitis are few and consist mainly of submucosal cleaning around the implants and removal of the inflamed soft tissue, and optimizing oral hygiene conditions [5].

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call