![]() To prevent water accumulation over the pressure sensitive electronic device, we modified it and used a metal pyramidal cap. The instrumentation with the ultrasonic devices was carried out under water-cooling. During the study, the teeth were stored in a formalin solution to prevent drying.Ī standardized application of force for each treatment method was achieved by mounting the teeth in a specially pressure sensitive electronic device. This area was selected and separated from other areas using a diamond-coated round bur. There were no significant differences between the initial calculus amounts among the groups.įor all the root experimental surfaces with subgingival calculus, scaling was performed on a 3×5 mm area. The samples had subgingival calculus, and they were divided into 4 experimental groups with each group containing 11 teeth. The tooth samples were evaluated both clinically and radiographically for periodontal disease involvement by expert periodontists. This study was conducted in vitro on 44 human tooth samples extracted due to severe periodontal disease. Furthermore, the amount of time needed to clean the root surface and the effects of the lateral forces were noted. ![]() The purpose of the present study was to compare the results of scaling with the use of magnetostrictive and piezoelectric devices on extracted teeth. A comparison of different piezoelectric or magnetostrictive ultrasonic devices can be expected to produce differences in tooth surface roughness. The roughness of the root surface after a scaling procedure is a factor to consider for maintenance because it has also been reported that bacterial plaque adheres easily to the rough root surfaces after treatment. reported that a piezoelectric device left a rougher surface than a magnetostrictive device after instrumentation. suggested that a magnetostrictive unit was more aggressive than a piezoelectric device for root substance removal. An analysis of the literature on the aggressiveness of magnetostrictive and piezoelectric ultrasonic scaling devices on tooth substances showed varying results. Tooth surface alterations produced using hand or ultrasonic instruments are of particular concern during periodontal therapy. Piezoelectric units operate in the 25 kHz to 50 kHz range and are reactivated by dimensional changes in the crystals housed within the hand-piece as electricity passes over the surface of the crystals tip movement is primarily linear in direction. Magnetostrictive units operate between 18 kHz and 45 kHz using flat metal strips in a stack or a metal rod attached to a scaling tip, and the tip movement is elliptical. Ultrasonic units in dentistry are currently available in two basic types: magnetostrictive and piezoelectric. Ultrasound can be produced by magnetostriction or piezoelectricity. Ultrasonic instrumentation is as effective as hand scaling for plaque and calculus removal and the successful healing of diseased periodontal tissues. Ultrasonic and sonic scalers differ in their efficiency in removing calculus from tooth surfaces. Ultrasonic and sonic scalers are referred to as power-driven scalers. Currently, hand instruments and sonic and ultrasonic scalers are used most frequently. ![]() The techniques used for scaling, root planning, and curettage are hand instrumentation, sonic and ultrasonic instrumentation, laser scaling, demineralization, and chemical scaling. ![]() This goal can be achieved by eliminating supra- and subgingival plaque and establishing destructive conditions because the essential characteristic in the treatment of periodontal diseases is the mechanical removal of bacterial deposits and calculus. Periodontal therapy aims at arresting periodontal infections and maintaining a healthy periodontium.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |