Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-9839
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWeusmann, Jens-
dc.contributor.authorDeschner, James-
dc.contributor.authorKeppler, Christopher-
dc.contributor.authorImber, Jean-Claude-
dc.contributor.authorCores Ziskoven, Pablo-
dc.contributor.authorSchumann, Sven-
dc.date.accessioned2024-01-03T10:38:37Z-
dc.date.available2024-01-03T10:38:37Z-
dc.date.issued2023-
dc.identifier.urihttps://openscience.ub.uni-mainz.de/handle/20.500.12030/9857-
dc.description.abstractObjectives To investigate the influence of instrumentation angle during low-abrasive air polishing (LAA) on the oral gingiva using an ex vivo porcine model. Material and methods Six tissue samples from each of 14 porcine mandibles were randomly selected and instrumented. Two different LAA powders (glycine 25 μm, tagatose 15 μm) were investigated. An application angle of either 30–60° or 90° was selected. Gingival specimens from different mandibles served as untreated references. Gingival biopsies were examined by scanning electron microscopy and paraffin histology for tissue destruction using a five-level scale. Results LAA caused significantly less tissue damage at a 90° angle than at a 30–60° angle. This effect was seen in both the glycine-based powder arms (p = 0.002, p = 0.046) and the tagatose-based powder arms (p = 0.003, p = 0.011). However, at identical working angles, the two powders did not show significant differences in terms of gingival erosion (p = 0.79 and p = 0.57; p = 0.91 and p = 0.78, respectively). Conclusions LAA may cause less tissue damage at an application angle of 90°. Consequently, it seems advisable to air-polish the soft tissue as perpendicularly as possible. Additionally, glycine and tagatose LAA powders do not seem to differ in concern of soft tissue damage. Clinical relevance Within the limitations of this ex vivo animal model, this study argues for an application that is as close as possible to the 90° angle intending to minimize soft tissue damage. Manufacturer specifications, however, mainly request applications deviating from the right angle. In order to work in interdental areas using LAA safely, the use of subgingival nozzles might be considered.en_GB
dc.language.isoengde
dc.rightsCC BY*
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subject.ddc610 Medizinde_DE
dc.subject.ddc610 Medical sciencesen_GB
dc.titleThe working angle in low-abrasive air polishing has an influence on gingival damage : an ex vivo porcine modelen_GB
dc.typeZeitschriftenaufsatzde
dc.identifier.doihttp://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-9839-
jgu.type.dinitypearticleen_GB
jgu.type.versionPublished versionde
jgu.type.resourceTextde
jgu.organisation.departmentFB 04 Medizinde
jgu.organisation.number2700-
jgu.organisation.nameJohannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz-
jgu.rights.accessrightsopenAccess-
jgu.journal.titleClinical oral investigationsde
jgu.journal.volume27de
jgu.pages.start6199de
jgu.pages.end6207de
jgu.publisher.year2023-
jgu.publisher.nameSpringerde
jgu.publisher.placeBerlin u.a.de
jgu.publisher.issn1436-3771de
jgu.organisation.placeMainz-
jgu.subject.ddccode610de
jgu.publisher.doi10.1007/s00784-023-05236-3de
jgu.organisation.rorhttps://ror.org/023b0x485-
Appears in collections:DFG-491381577-H

Files in This Item:
  File Description SizeFormat
Thumbnail
the_working_angle_in_lowabras-20231215111430037.pdf1.74 MBAdobe PDFView/Open