Top

Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie

Published in:

01-09-2013 | Original article

Effects of air-polishing devices with different abrasives on bovine primary and second teeth and deciduous human teeth

Authors: M. Khalefa, C. Finke, Prof. Dr. P.-G. Jost-Brinkmann

Published in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie | Issue 5/2013

Abstract

Objective

The present study investigates the effect of air polishing using different combinations of devices and abrasive powders on bovine secondary and primary dentition and on human deciduous teeth.

Materials and methods

Lower incisors of freshly slaughtered calves and cows were partially embedded in polyurethane and polished flat. Human deciduous incisors and second molars were subjected to the same procedure. These various tooth types (bovine secondary, bovine primary, human deciduous) were then randomly assigned to 22 groups containing 10 teeth each. The specimens in each group were treated by a specific combination of an air-polishing device (n=2; PROPHYflex 3®, Air-Flow® Handy 2+) and an abrasive (n=3; Air-Flow® Pulver Classic, ClinPro™ Prophy Powder, PROPHYpearls®) applied from a distance of 5±0.5 mm at maximum setting for 60 s. Additional groups of specimens were polished with CCS® 40 or Cleanic® pastes applied with a rotating brush at low speed. A Perthometer PCV profilometer was used to analyze the degrees of surface roughness and enamel reduction in each group.

Results

PROPHYpearls® created significantly (p<0.05; t-test) more surface roughness and enamel reduction than both Air-Flow® and ClinPro™. There was no significant difference between the latter two abrasives. Any surface changes created by blasting or polishing were significantly (p<0.05; t-test) smaller on the bovine secondary teeth than on bovine primary or human deciduous teeth, with no significant difference between the latter two. The degrees of surface roughness induced by air polishing surpassed the effect of CCS® 40 paste but resembled the effect of Cleanic® paste.

Conclusion

Both Air-Flow® Handy 2+ and PROPHYflex 3® are appropriate devices to remove plaque and discoloration from the surface of deciduous teeth. PROPHYpearls® powder is excessively aggressive.

Attin T, Wegehaupt F, Gries D et al (2007) The potential of deciduous and permanent bovine enamel as substitute for deciduous and permanent human enamel: erosion-abrasion experiments. J Dent 35:773–777PubMedCrossRef

Botti RH, Bossù M, Zallocco N et al (2010) Effectiveness of plaque indicators and air polishing for the sealing of pits and fissures. Eur J Paediatr Dent 11:15–18PubMed

Brown JR, Barkmeier WW (1996) A comparison of six enamel treatment procedures for sealant bonding. Pediatr Dent 18:29–31PubMed

Castanho GM, Arana-Chavez VE, Fava M (2008) Roughness of human enamel surface submitted to different prophylaxis methods. J Clin Pediatr Dent 32:299–303PubMed

Boever JA de, Vande Velde F (1985) Pulverstrahlgeräte zur Belagsentfernung. Eine klinische und rasterelektronenmikroskopische Studie. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 40:725–729PubMed

Engel S, Jost-Brinkmann P-G, Spors CK et al (2009) Abrasive effect of air-powder polishing on smoothsurface sealants. J Orofac Orthop 70:363–370PubMedCrossRef

Fonseca RB, Haiter-Neto F, Carlo HL et al (2008) Radiodensity and hardness of enamel and dentin of human and bovine teeth, varying bovine teeth age. Arch Oral Biol 53:1023–1029PubMedCrossRef

Frankenberger R, Lohbauer U, Tay FR et al (2007) The effect of different air-polishing powders on dentin bonding. J Adhes Dent 9:381–389PubMed

Gente M, Sondermann U, Lehmann K (1985) Linearer thermischer Ausdehnungskoeffizient von Rinderschmelz und Rinderdentin. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 40:488–490PubMed

10.

Gerbo LR, Lacefield WR, Barnes CM et al (1993) Enamel roughness after air-powder polishing. Am J Dent 6:96–98PubMed

11.

Horning G (1987) Clinical use of an air-powder abrasive. Compendium 8:652, 654–655, 658PubMed

12.

Hosoya Y, Johnston JW (1989) Evaluation of various cleaning and polishing methods on primary enamel. J Pedod 13:253–269PubMed

13.

Jost-Brinkmann P-G (1997) Wirkung und Nebenwirkungen von Pulver-Wasser-Strahlgeräten bei regelmäßiger Anwendung in der Orthodontie. Mainz, Aachen

14.

Jost-Brinkmann P-G (1998) The influence of air polishers on tooth enamel. An in-vitro study. J Orofac Orthop 59:1–16PubMedCrossRef

15.

Jost-Brinkmann P-G (2003) Prophylaxe in der Kieferorthopädie − Was ist anders? In: Roulet JF, Zimmer S (Hrsg) Prophylaxe und Präventivzahnmedizin. Thieme, Stuttgart, S 147–156

16.

Jost-Brinkmann P-G, Goebel S (2002) Wirkung von Pulver-Wasser-Strahlgeräten auf die Oberflächenspannung von Zahnschmelz. ZMK 18:112–114

17.

Kontturi-Närhi V, Markkanen S, Markkanen H (1990) Effects of airpolishing on dental plaque removal and hard tissues as evaluated by scanning electron microscopy. J Periodontol 61:334–338PubMedCrossRef

18.

Krifka S, Börzsönyi A, Koch A et al (2008) Bond strength of adhesive systems to dentin and enamel—human vs. bovine primary teeth in vitro. Dent Mater 24:888–894PubMedCrossRef

19.

Lutz F, Imfeld T (2002) Advances in abrasive technology—prophylaxis pastes. Compend Contin Educ Dent 23:61–64, 66, 68 passim (quiz 72)PubMed

20.

Meier A, Stassinakis A, Hugo B et al (2000) Substanzverlust und Oberflächenrauigkeit nach Bearbeitung mit Prophylaxeinstrumenten in vitro. Acta Med Dent Helv 5:31–36

21.

Mellberg JR (1992) Hard-tissue substrates for evaluation of cariogenic and anti-cariogenic activity in situ. J Dent Res 71 Spec No:913–919

22.

Mishkin DJ, Engler WO, Javed T et al (1986) A clinical comparison of the effect on the gingiva of the Prophy-Jet and the rubber cup and paste techniques. J Periodontol 57:151–154PubMedCrossRef

23.

Nedwed V (2003) Untersuchung zu den Wirkungen eines Pulver-Wasser-Strahlgerätes auf Zahnschmelz und verschiedene Füllungs- und Befestigungsmaterialien in der Kieferorthopädie—Eine In-vitro-Studie zum PROPHYflex 2. Zahnmed Diss, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin

24.

Pelka M, Trautmann S, Petschelt A et al (2010) Influence of air-polishing devices and abrasives on root dentin—an in vitro confocal laser scanning microscope study. Quintessence Int 41:e141–e148PubMed

25.

Pelka MA, Altmaier K, Petschelt A et al (2010) The effect of air-polishing abrasives on wear of direct restoration materials and sealants. J Am Dent Assoc 141:63–70PubMed

26.

Petersilka GJ, Bell M, Häberlein I et al (2003) In vitro evaluation of novel low abrasive air polishing powders. J Clin Periodontol 30:9–13PubMedCrossRef

27.

Petersilka GJ, Schenck U, Flemmig TF (2002) Powder emission rates of four air polishing devices. J Clin Periodontol 29:694–698PubMedCrossRef

28.

Putt MS, Kleber CJ, Muhler JC (1980) A comparison of the polishing properties of human and bovine enamel. J Dent Res 59:1177PubMedCrossRef

29.

Ripa LW, Gwinnett AJ, Buonocore MG (1966) The “prismless” outer layer of deciduous and permanent enamel. Arch Oral Biol 11:41–48PubMedCrossRef

30.

Schiffner U (1992) Die Einwirkung eines abrasiven Pulverstrahles auf artifiziell demineralisierten Schmelz. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 47:778–781

31.

Schulte A (2003) Auswirkungen von Wasser-Pulverstrahlgeräten auf Zahnhartgewebe und Restaurationsmaterialien. ZMK 19:2–5

32.

Schwientek K (2011) Der Einfluss unterschiedlicher Prophylaxepulver auf die adhäsive Verbundfestigkeit von Etch&Rinse- und Self-Etch-Adhäsiven. Zahnmed Diss, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität, Nürnberg

33.

Titley KC, Childers S, Kulkarni G (2006) An in vitro comparison of short and long term bond strengths of polyacid modified composite resins to primary human and bovine enamel and dentine. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 7:246–252PubMedCrossRef

34.

Walmsley AD, Williams AR, Laird WR (1987) The air-powder dental abrasive unit—an evaluation using a model system. J Oral Rehabil 14:43–50PubMedCrossRef

35.

Weaks LM, Lescher NB, Barnes CM et al (1984) Clinical evaluation of the Prophy-Jet as an instrument for routine removal of tooth stain and plaque. J Periodontol 55:486–488PubMedCrossRef

36.

White DJ, Peyton FA (1954) Effects of air abrasive in prophylaxis. J Am Dent Assoc 49:155–163PubMed

37.

Willmann DE, Norling BK, Johnson WN (1980) A new prophylaxis instrument: effect on enamel alterations. J Am Dent Assoc 101:923–925PubMed

38.

Wilmes B, Vali S, Drescher D (2009) In-vitro study of surface changes in fixed orthodontic appliances following air polishing with ClinPro Prophy and Air-Flow. J Orofac Orthop 70:371–384PubMedCrossRef

Title: Effects of air-polishing devices with different abrasives on bovine primary and second teeth and deciduous human teeth
Authors: M. Khalefa
C. Finke
Prof. Dr. P.-G. Jost-Brinkmann
Publication date: 01-09-2013
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie / Issue 5/2013
Print ISSN: 1434-5293
Electronic ISSN: 1615-6714
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-013-0168-6

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Effects of air-polishing devices with different abrasives on bovine primary and second teeth and deciduous human teeth

Abstract

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2013

Comparison of three methods to assess individual skeletal maturity

Control of lower incisor inclination with a completely customized lingual appliance for dentoalveolar compensation of class III malocclusion

DGKFO-Mitteilungen

Erratum to: Are there differences on tooth movement between different sectional canine retractors?

Intrauterine hormone effects on tooth dimensions

Investigation of bone conditions for orthodontic anchorage plates in the anterior mandible