Soft tissue response to titanium healing abutments treated by Er: YAG laser or plasma spray: A randomized controlled feasibility clinical study with SEM and histological analysis.

Dalia Yossri, Nevine H Kheir El Din, Nermeen Sami Afifi, Doaa Adel-Khattab
{"title":"Soft tissue response to titanium healing abutments treated by Er: YAG laser or plasma spray: A randomized controlled feasibility clinical study with SEM and histological analysis.","authors":"Dalia Yossri, Nevine H Kheir El Din, Nermeen Sami Afifi, Doaa Adel-Khattab","doi":"10.1111/cid.13373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Soft tissue seal around implants ensures stable osseointegration and a long-term survival of dental implants. Different surface modification and decontamination for implant abutments were endorsed in order to improve peri-implant soft tissue healing, such as laser, plasma spray, acid etching, and steaming. The aim of this study was to evaluate the response of peri-implant soft tissue to titanium abutments treated with Erbium-doped: Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet (Er:YAG) laser versus plasma spray.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty-four patients who required implant placement in the maxillary arch participated in this study. Patients were divided into three groups, abutments treated with Er:YAG laser versus cold plasma spray and untreated abutments. Fourteen days following the implant abutment insertion, soft tissue peri-implant biopsies were taken for histological, histochemical, and immunohistochemical evaluation. Scanning electron microscopy was done for the abutments; plaque index (PI) and gingival index (GI) were assessed 14 days and 3 months following final restoration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Regarding the histological results, the least mean inflammatory cell count was in the plasma group (174.09 ± 40.67), followed by the laser group (654.27 ± 85.95) and the control group (852.00 ± 117.98), with statistically significant differences between them. The mean area fraction of collagen fibers showed the highest value in the plasma group (9.73 ± 1.91), followed by the laser group (3.25 ± 0.49), while the lowest value was found in the control group (1.17 ± 0.51). The immunohistochemical expression of E-cadherin was significantly higher and uniformly distributed in the plasma group (42.4 ± 11.2%) followed by the laser group (15.4 ± 4.07%) and the control group (6.8 ± 1.7%). SEM analysis of healing abutments showed fibroblast-like cells, which were more developed with dense fibers in the plasma group; laser group fibers showed fewer and more delicate fibers than the plasma group, while no fibers were detected in the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Within the limitations of this feasibility study, the present data concluded that plasma spray and Erbium: YAG laser can be used for abutment surface treatment to achieve better peri-implant soft tissue healing. Clinically and histologically, plasma spray showed a better effect on the peri-implant soft tissues by reducing the inflammatory reaction, promoting collagen fiber formation, higher fibroblast-like cell attachment, and upregulating E-cadherin expression than Erbium: YAG laser and control groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":93944,"journal":{"name":"Clinical implant dentistry and related research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical implant dentistry and related research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.13373","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Soft tissue seal around implants ensures stable osseointegration and a long-term survival of dental implants. Different surface modification and decontamination for implant abutments were endorsed in order to improve peri-implant soft tissue healing, such as laser, plasma spray, acid etching, and steaming. The aim of this study was to evaluate the response of peri-implant soft tissue to titanium abutments treated with Erbium-doped: Yttrium-Aluminum-Garnet (Er:YAG) laser versus plasma spray.

Methods: Twenty-four patients who required implant placement in the maxillary arch participated in this study. Patients were divided into three groups, abutments treated with Er:YAG laser versus cold plasma spray and untreated abutments. Fourteen days following the implant abutment insertion, soft tissue peri-implant biopsies were taken for histological, histochemical, and immunohistochemical evaluation. Scanning electron microscopy was done for the abutments; plaque index (PI) and gingival index (GI) were assessed 14 days and 3 months following final restoration.

Results: Regarding the histological results, the least mean inflammatory cell count was in the plasma group (174.09 ± 40.67), followed by the laser group (654.27 ± 85.95) and the control group (852.00 ± 117.98), with statistically significant differences between them. The mean area fraction of collagen fibers showed the highest value in the plasma group (9.73 ± 1.91), followed by the laser group (3.25 ± 0.49), while the lowest value was found in the control group (1.17 ± 0.51). The immunohistochemical expression of E-cadherin was significantly higher and uniformly distributed in the plasma group (42.4 ± 11.2%) followed by the laser group (15.4 ± 4.07%) and the control group (6.8 ± 1.7%). SEM analysis of healing abutments showed fibroblast-like cells, which were more developed with dense fibers in the plasma group; laser group fibers showed fewer and more delicate fibers than the plasma group, while no fibers were detected in the control group.

Conclusion: Within the limitations of this feasibility study, the present data concluded that plasma spray and Erbium: YAG laser can be used for abutment surface treatment to achieve better peri-implant soft tissue healing. Clinically and histologically, plasma spray showed a better effect on the peri-implant soft tissues by reducing the inflammatory reaction, promoting collagen fiber formation, higher fibroblast-like cell attachment, and upregulating E-cadherin expression than Erbium: YAG laser and control groups.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用 Er: YAG 激光或等离子喷涂处理钛愈合基台的软组织反应:采用扫描电镜和组织学分析的随机对照可行性临床研究。
目的:种植体周围软组织的密封可确保稳定的骨结合和种植体的长期存活。为了改善种植体周围软组织愈合,人们对种植基台进行了不同的表面改良和净化处理,如激光、等离子喷射、酸蚀和蒸气。本研究的目的是评估种植体周围软组织对掺铒钇铝基台处理过的钛基台的反应:方法:24名需要在上颌牙弓植入种植体的患者参与了这项研究。患者被分为三组,即使用 Er:YAG 激光与冷等离子喷涂处理过的基台和未处理过的基台。种植体基台植入 14 天后,取种植体周围软组织活检,进行组织学、组织化学和免疫组化评估。对基台进行扫描电子显微镜检查;在最终修复后 14 天和 3 个月分别评估菌斑指数(PI)和牙龈指数(GI):在组织学结果方面,等离子组的平均炎症细胞数最少(174.09 ± 40.67),其次是激光组(654.27 ± 85.95)和对照组(852.00 ± 117.98),它们之间的差异有统计学意义。胶原纤维的平均面积分数显示,血浆组最高(9.73 ± 1.91),其次是激光组(3.25 ± 0.49),而对照组最低(1.17 ± 0.51)。E-cadherin的免疫组化表达在血浆组(42.4 ± 11.2%)明显较高且分布均匀,其次是激光组(15.4 ± 4.07%)和对照组(6.8 ± 1.7%)。对愈合基台的扫描电镜分析显示,等离子组的成纤维细胞更发达,纤维更致密;激光组的纤维比等离子组更少、更细,而对照组未检测到纤维:结论:在本可行性研究的限制条件下,本研究数据得出结论,等离子体喷射和铒:结论:在本可行性研究的限制条件下,本研究数据得出结论,等离子喷涂和铒:YAG 激光可用于基台表面处理,以实现更好的种植体周围软组织愈合。从临床和组织学角度来看,等离子喷剂对种植体周围软组织的作用更好,与铒:YAG 激光组和对照组相比,等离子喷剂能减轻炎症反应,促进胶原纤维形成,提高成纤维细胞的附着力,上调 E-cadherin 的表达:YAG 激光组和对照组。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Survival and Success of 3D-Printed Versus Milled Immediate Provisional Full-Arch Restorations: A Retrospective Analysis. Accuracy of Photogrammetry, Intraoral Scanning, and Conventional Impression for Multiple Implants: An In Vitro Study. The Effect of NiTi Brush, Polishing Brush, and Chemical Agent on the Dental Implant Surface Morphology and Cytocompatibility. Transitional implants in computer-assisted implant surgery and fixed complete-arch provisionalization: A retrospective case series. Budget Impact Analysis: Digital Workflow Significantly Reduces Costs of Implant Supported Overdentures (IODs).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1