J Korean Acad Oral Health.  2024 Dec;48(4):169-176. 10.11149/jkaoh.2024.48.4.169.

Comparison of wear on the surfaces of denture base resins based on the type and application angle of ultrasonic scaler tips

• Kang ES

• KMID: 2563403
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.11149/jkaoh.2024.48.4.169

Abstract

Objectives
This study aimed to evaluate the effect of different types and angulations of ultrasonic scaler tips on the surfaces of denture base resins.
Methods
Heat-polymerized and computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) denture base resin specimens were manufactured in rectangular shapes (60×10×3 mm) and divided into four groups. Stainless-steel and carbon scaler tips were applied at angles of 0° and 45° with 100 g of weight for 60 seconds, and the depth and volume of the surface defects were compared.
Results
Stainless-steel tips with a 45° angle showed a larger defect depth and volume than stainless-steel tips with a 0° angle and carbon tips with a 0° angle (P<0.001). No result was observed when using carbon tips with a 45° angle because the scaler tip broke during the experiment. No significant differences were observed between the heat-cured and CAD/CAM resins at 0° angles.
Conclusions
Within the limits of this study, as the angle of the scaler tip increased, the depth and volume of the defect increased. And, when the angle was 0°, no significant differences were observed between the effects of the stainless-steel and carbon tips.

Keyword

Abrasion; Denture base; Scaling; Ultrasonic

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Photographs of materials and apparatus evaluated in the present study. (A) Denture base resin specimen. The specimen was divided into four areas. (B) Lateral aspect of the two different scaler tips. (Left) Stainless steel scaler tip (Satelec #1). (Right) Carbon scaler tip (PH1). (C) Ultrasonic scaling apparatus. The ultrasonic scaler was fixed using a handpiece holder and clamped into a plastic sleeve.

• 

  Fig. 2 Keyence VHX-7000 digital microscope tool.

• 

  Fig. 3 Macroscopic images of the defect formation area. (C-45 had no results due to the scaler tip breaking during the experiment and S-45 was presented larger to better observe the shape of the defect). (A-F) 2-Dimensional images of the defect. (G-L) 3-Dimensional images of the defect. (A, G) Heat curing resin specimen with stainless steel tip (0 degree). (B, H) Heat curing resin specimen with stainless steel tip (45 degrees). (C, I) Heat curing resin specimen with carbon tip (0 degree). (D, J) CAD-CAM resin specimen with stainless steel tip (0 degree). (E, K) CAD-CAM resin specimen with stainless steel tip (45 degrees). (F, L) CAD-CAM resin specimen with carbon tip (0 degree).

• 

  Fig. 4 Cross section views of the two different scaler tips evaluated in the present study. (A) Stainless steel scaler tip. The sides of the tip are relatively rounded. (B) Carbon scaler tip. The tip is more pointed and has sharp edges on the sides.

Reference

References

1. Matsumura K, Sato Y, Kitagawa N, Shichita T, Kawata D, Ishikawa M. 2018; Influence of denture surface roughness and host factors on dental calculi formation on dentures: a cross-sectional study. BMC Oral Health. 18:1–9. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-018-0543-1. PMID: 29728082. PMCID: PMC5936015.

2. Branting C, Sund ML, Linder LE. 1989; The influence of Streptococcus mutans on adhesion of Candida albicans to acrylic surfaces in vitro. Archives of Oral Biology. 34:347–353. DOI: 10.1016/0003-9969(89)90108-8. PMID: 2532001.

3. Scotti R, Fenzi GV, Arcidiacono A. 1998; Effect of ultrasonic scalers, burs and silicone points on the resins for denture bases. Minerva stomatologica. 47:303–308.

4. Chang YH, Lee CY, Hsu MS, Du JK, Chen KK, Wu JH. 2021; Effect of toothbrush/dentifrice abrasion on weight variation, surface roughness, surface morphology and hardness of conventional and CAD/CAM denture base materials. Dental materials journal. 40:220–227. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2019-226. PMID: 33028789.

5. Gwinnett AJ, Caputo L. 1983; The effectiveness of ultrasonic denture cleaning: a scanning electron microscope study. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 50:20–25. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(83)90159-2. PMID: 6576152.

6. Ha DS, Lee KH. 2023; Clean effect of a cetylpyridinium chloride-based mouthwash on removable orthodontic appliances. J Korean Soc Dent Hyg. 23:227–234. DOI: 10.13065/jksdh.20230025.

7. Seol HW, Heo SJ, Koak JY, Kim SK, Baek SH, Lee SY. 2012; Surface alterations of several dental materials by a novel ultrasonic scaler tip. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 27:801–810.

8. Mourouzis P, Koulaouzidou EA, Vassiliadis L, Helvatjoglu-Antoniades M. 2009; Effects of sonic scaling on the surface roughness of restorative materials. Journal of oral science. 51:607–614. DOI: 10.2334/josnusd.51.607. PMID: 20032615.

9. Mahiroglu MB, Kahramanoglu E, Ay M, Kuru L, Agrali OB. 2020; Comparison of Root Surface Wear and Roughness Resulted from Different Ultrasonic Scalers and Polishing Devices Applied on Human Teeth: An In-Vitro Study. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute. 8:55–66. DOI: 10.3390/healthcare8010055. PMID: 32155974. PMCID: PMC7151259.

10. Hosoi T, Ishikawa C. 1999; Formation processes of denture plaque and denture Calculus, and method of the elimination of their deposits. J Prosthodont Res. 43:649–658. DOI: 10.2186/jjps.43.649.

11. Unursaikhan O, Lee JS, Cha JK, Park JC, Jung UW, Kim CS, et al. 2012; Comparative evaluation of roughness of titanium surfaces treated by different hygiene instruments. Journal of periodontal &. implant science. 42:88–94. DOI: 10.5051/jpis.2012.42.3.88.

12. Jepsen S, Ayna M, Hedderich J, Eberhard J. 2004; Significant influence of scaler tip design on root substance loss resulting from ultrasonic scaling: a laser profilometric in vitro study. Journal of clinical periodontology. 31:1003–1006. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2004.00601.x. PMID: 15491317.

13. Sahrmann P, Winkler S, Gubler A, Attin T. 2021; Assessment of implant surface and instrument insert changes due to instrumentation with different tips for ultrasonic-driven debridement. BMC Oral Health. 21:1–11. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-020-01384-0. PMID: 33413296. PMCID: PMC7791805.

14. Arora O, Ahmed N, Nallaswamy D, Ganapathy D, Srinivasan M. 2024; May. 1. Denture base materials: An in vitro evaluation of the mechanical and color properties. J Dent. [Epub]. DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2024.104993. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2024.104993. PMID: 38657724.

15. Alammari MR. 2017; The influence of polishing techniques on pre-polymerized CAD-CAM acrylic resin denture bases. Electronic physician. 9:5452–5458. DOI: 10.19082/5452. PMID: 29238483. PMCID: PMC5718847.

16. Prpić V, Schauperl Z, Ćatić A, Dulčić N, Čimić S. 2020; Comparison of mechanical properties of 3D-printed, CAD/CAM, and conventional denture base materials. Journal of prosthodontics. 29:524–528. DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13175. PMID: 32270904.

17. Flemmig TF, Petersilka GJ, Mehl A, Rüdiger S, Hickel R, Klaiber B. 1997; Working parameters of a sonic scaler influencing root substance removal in vitro. Clinical oral investigations. 1:55–60. DOI: 10.1007/s007840050011. PMID: 9552818.

18. Oliveira G, Macedo PD, Tsurumaki JN, Sampaio JE, Marcantonio R. 2016; The effect of the angle of instrumentation of the Piezoelectric Ultrasonic Scaler on root surfaces. Int J Dent Hyg. 14:184–190. DOI: 10.1111/idh.12134. PMID: 25690687.

19. Trenter SC, Landini G, Walmsley AD. 2003; Effect of loading on the vibration characteristics of thin magnetostrictive ultrasonic scaler inserts. Journal of periodontology. 74:1308–1315. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2003.74.9.1308. PMID: 14584863.

20. Ruppert M, Cadosch J, Guindy J, Case D, Zappa U. 2002; In vivo ultrasonic debridement force in bicuspids: A pilot study. J Periodontol. 73:418–422. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2002.73.4.418. PMID: 11990443.

21. Field J, Waterhouse P, German M. 2010; Quantifying and qualifying surface changes on dental hard tissues in vitro. J Dent. 38:182–190. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2010.01.002. PMID: 20079800.

22. Flemmig TF, Petersilka GJ, Mehl A, Hickel R, Klaiber B. 1998; Working parameters of a Magnetostrictive ultrasonic sealer influencing root substance removal in vitro. Journal of periodontology. 69:547–553. DOI: 10.1902/jop.1998.69.5.547. PMID: 9623897.