Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Comparison of three in vitro implant leakage testing methods


Al-Jadaa, Anas; Attin, Thomas; Peltomäki, Timo; Schmidlin, Patrick R (2015). Comparison of three in vitro implant leakage testing methods. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 26(4):e1-7.

Abstract

AIMS: To assess the accuracy and sensitivity in detecting implants leakage with a gas-enhanced permeation test (GEPT) and to compare with a molecular- and a bacterial-based leakage tests.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three implants systems were tested (n = 20 per group): Nobel Biocare (NB), Astra Tech (AT) and Biomet 3i (B3i). Implants were mounted in PVC disks and were first tested for gas pressure change and infiltrated saline volume over 40 min. The same implants were then subjected to a molecular leakage evaluation using fluorescent Dextran for 28 days. After cleaning and sterilization, bacterial permeation (E. faecalis) was evaluated by selective media turbidity for another 28 days. Slopes in the pressure change and the perfused saline rate were used as a measure of leakage in the GEPT model and the times of positive events, that is, color change, after molecular and bacterial tests were recorded. Data were analyzed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov/Shapiro-Wilk, Kruskal-Wallis H and Spearman's Rho tests (P < 0.05).
RESULTS: The gas and saline (ml) leakage values accounted for 0.85 ± 0.71 and 0.56 ± 0.50 ml (AT), 0.23 ± 0.030 and 0.12 ± 0.20 ml (NB) and 0.01 ± 0.01 and 0 ± 0 ml (B3i), respectively, and were significantly different from each other (P < 0.001). Slope in the pressure change over time showed a significant positive correlation with the collected saline solution (r = 0.91; P < 0.001). Molecular and bacterial leakage was positive at the same implants, which also showed increased leakage values in the GEPT setup. The development of positive events in the timeline of the bacterial leakage evaluation corresponded well to the GEPT leakage model.
CONCLUSION: The GEPT proved to be a reliable method to quantify leakage. The B3i showed the best sealing among the tested systems.

Abstract

AIMS: To assess the accuracy and sensitivity in detecting implants leakage with a gas-enhanced permeation test (GEPT) and to compare with a molecular- and a bacterial-based leakage tests.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three implants systems were tested (n = 20 per group): Nobel Biocare (NB), Astra Tech (AT) and Biomet 3i (B3i). Implants were mounted in PVC disks and were first tested for gas pressure change and infiltrated saline volume over 40 min. The same implants were then subjected to a molecular leakage evaluation using fluorescent Dextran for 28 days. After cleaning and sterilization, bacterial permeation (E. faecalis) was evaluated by selective media turbidity for another 28 days. Slopes in the pressure change and the perfused saline rate were used as a measure of leakage in the GEPT model and the times of positive events, that is, color change, after molecular and bacterial tests were recorded. Data were analyzed using Kolmogorov-Smirnov/Shapiro-Wilk, Kruskal-Wallis H and Spearman's Rho tests (P < 0.05).
RESULTS: The gas and saline (ml) leakage values accounted for 0.85 ± 0.71 and 0.56 ± 0.50 ml (AT), 0.23 ± 0.030 and 0.12 ± 0.20 ml (NB) and 0.01 ± 0.01 and 0 ± 0 ml (B3i), respectively, and were significantly different from each other (P < 0.001). Slope in the pressure change over time showed a significant positive correlation with the collected saline solution (r = 0.91; P < 0.001). Molecular and bacterial leakage was positive at the same implants, which also showed increased leakage values in the GEPT setup. The development of positive events in the timeline of the bacterial leakage evaluation corresponded well to the GEPT leakage model.
CONCLUSION: The GEPT proved to be a reliable method to quantify leakage. The B3i showed the best sealing among the tested systems.

Statistics

Citations

2 citations in Web of Science®
2 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

3 downloads since deposited on 13 Jan 2014
0 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic for Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Cariology
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:April 2015
Deposited On:13 Jan 2014 13:53
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 17:21
Publisher:Wiley-Blackwell
ISSN:0905-7161
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12314
PubMed ID:24330007

Download