An In Vitro study to Compare Dental Laser with other Treatment Modalities on Biofilm Ablation from Implant and Tooth Surfaces

Sunil Kumar Vaddamanu; Rajesh Vyas; Kumari Kavita; R Sushma; R Padmini Rani; Arti Dixit; Bhumika Kamal Badiyani

doi:10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_98_22

An In Vitro study to Compare Dental Laser with other Treatment Modalities on Biofilm Ablation from Implant and Tooth Surfaces

J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2022 Jul;14(Suppl 1):S530-S533. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_98_22. Epub 2022 Jul 13.

Authors

Sunil Kumar Vaddamanu¹, Rajesh Vyas¹, Kumari Kavita², R Sushma³, R Padmini Rani⁴, Arti Dixit⁵, Bhumika Kamal Badiyani⁶

Affiliations

¹ Department of Dental Technology, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
² Department of Dentistry, NMCH, Patna, Bihar, India.
³ Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dental Sciences, Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences "Deemed to be University (KIMSDU), Maharashtra, India.
⁴ MDS Prosthodontics KIDS, KIIT University, Bhubaneswar Odisha, Phd Scholar in Prosthodontics and Crown and Bridge, KIIT University Bhubaneswar Odisha Senior Resident, SCB Dental College and Hospital, Cuttack, Odisha, India.
⁵ Reader, Department of Public Health Dentistry, Vaidik Dental College & Research Centre, Daman, Daman & Diu, India.
⁶ Department of Public Health Dentistry, MDS Public Health Dentistry, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.

Abstract

Background: Periodontal and peri-implant disorders are etiologically linked to bacterial biofilms. The researchers wanted to see how well the erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) laser removed bacterial biofilms along with attached epithelial cells (EC), gingival fibroblasts (GF), in addition to osteoblast-like cells (OC) dentin along with titanium surfaces compared to previous therapy methods.

Methodology: 3.5 days were spent growing bacterial biofilms on standardized dentin and also titanium samplings using a sand-blasted along with the acid-etched surface. Following that, the specimens were positioned into pockets that had been formed artificially. The following approaches were used to remove biofilm: (1) Er:YAG, (2) photodynamic therapy (PDT), and (3) curette (CUR) along with supplementary PDT (CUR/PDT). The remaining biofilms' colony forming units (CFUs) were determined, as well as the attachment of EC, GF, in addition to OC. Analysis of variance with a posthoc least significant difference was utilized in the statistical analysis.

Results: When compared to untreated dentin and titanium surfaces, all therapy strategies reduced total CFUs in statistically significant biofilms (p = 0.001). On the dentin, Er:YAG was as effective as CUR and PDT, but not as effective as CUR/PDT (p = 0.005). The application of Er:YAG on titanium surfaces leads to statistically significantly improved biofilm eradication equated to the supplementary three therapies (all p = 0.001). On untouched infested dentin and titanium surfaces, the counts of attached EC, GF, and OC were the lowermost. Atop the dentin, increased EC counts were detected after CUR/PDT (p = 0.006). On titanium, all cleaning procedures increased the counts of attached EC by a statistically significant amount (p = 0.001), with no variations between groups. After Er:YAG decontamination, there were statistically substantially elevated amounts of GF (p = 0.024) and OC (p = 0.001) than on untreated surfaces.

Conclusion: The usage of Er:YAG laser to ablate subgingival biofilms and, specifically, to decontaminate titanium implant surfaces appears to be a promising strategy that needs further research.

Keywords: Biofilm; Er:YAG laser; dental implant; periodontal and peri-implant diseases.