implants - international magazine of oral implantology

Fig.3_Implantfollowingmechanical debridementusingacurette (lightmicroscope,×20). Fig.4_Implantfollowingmechanical debridementusingthetitaniumbrush (lightmicroscope,×20). Fig.5_Implantsurfacebeforetreat- ment(SEM,x100). Fig.6_Implantsurfaceaftercuretting (SEM,x100). Fig.7_Implantsurfaceafter debridementusingthetitaniumbrush (SEM,x100). Fig.8_Implantsurfaceafter debridementusingthetitaniumbrush (SEM,x200). research I to the architecture of the implant. In a previous study6 we have analyzed the effect of rotating tita- niumbrushes(PeriBrush™,TigranTechnologies;Fig. 2) on different types of implant surfaces. Implants with an anodized surface and implants with a tita- nium-blasted surface were examined with a scan- ningelectronmicroscopic(SEM)andwithaKeyence VHX 600 before and after treatment with a single- userotatingtitaniumbrushaswellasbeforeandaf- ter curetting. For the purposes of this study, the brush was inserted into an angled hand piece and heldagainsttheimplantwhilerotatingat300to600 rpm. Only minimal pressure was applied, because excessive pressure can bend the titanium brushes and reduce the cleaning effect. Under the light mi- croscope, the traces of curettage are clearly visible (Fig. 3), whereas the treatment with the rotating brush results in only barely discernible damage to the implant surface. The brush has an even, slightly smoothingeffectontheimplantsurface(Fig.4).This is confirmed by the corresponding SEM images (Figs. 5–8). The topographic effect of the rotating brush on the implants surface and on the brush itself is di- rectly correlated with the horizontal load/force and the duration of the treatment. In the actual study “Clinicalparametersfortheuseofrotatingtitanium debridement brushes” we analyzed the surface ef- fects of different loads/forces between 10 and 60 g / 0.1-0.6 N on the surface of sandblasted and acid etched implants. Four implants were fixed at the apex in Pattern Resin, GC. The Pattern Resin plate with the implant in the middle was fixed in a turning machine and carefully turned down until a complete rational symmetry with the centered implant was achieved (Fig.9).TwoscrewsfixedthePatternResinplatewith thecenteredimplantonamotordrivenplateofalu- minum (Fig 10). To ensure the different horizontal loads/forces onto the KaVo angel piece and therefore on the ro- tating PeriBrush, a spring based construction (springsteelwire)withdefineddistancesofimpres- sion under load was used. The spring length shows a linear correlation to the load/force as seen in Fig- ure 11. Fixed in an angle piece (KaVo), the Tigran™ Peri- Brush™transfersadefinedhorizontalload/forceon the implants surface according to the predefined length of the spring. The angle piece works with ad- ditionalrinsingat600rpmandhasbeenappliedver- tically against the implant at an angle about 20–30 degrees, so that the bristles make contact with the circular side of the implant and also clean in be- I 21implants3_2012 Fig. 3 Fig. 4 Fig. 5 Fig. 6 Fig. 7 Fig. 8