Bactericidal Effect of Different Photochemical-Based Therapy Options on Implant Surfaces—An In Vitro Study
Johannes-Simon Wenzler,Svenja Caroline Wurzel,Wolfgang Falk,Sarah Böcher,Piet Palle Wurzel,Andreas Braun
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13144212
IF: 3.9
2024-07-19
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Abstract:Objectives: Photochemical systems are frequently recommended as an adjuvant treatment option in peri-implantitis therapy. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of these treatment options, as well as a novel curcumin-based option, in a biofilm model on implants. Methods: Eighty dental implants were inoculated with an artificial biofilm of periodontal pathogens and placed in peri-implant pocket models. The following groups were analyzed: I, photodynamic therapy (PDT); II, PDT dye; III, curcumin/DMSO + laser; IV, curcumin/DMSO only; V, dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) only; VI, photothermal therapy (PTT); VII, PTT dye; VIII, control. After treatment, remaining bacterial loads were assessed microbiologically using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction analysis. Results: The PDT, PTT, and DMSO treatment methods were associated with statistically significant (p < 0.05) improvements in germ reduction in comparison with the other methods and the untreated control group. The mean percentage reductions were as follows: I (PDT) 93.9%, II (PDT dye) 62.9%, III (curcumin/DMSO + laser) 74.8%, IV (curcumin/DMSO only) 67.9%, V (DMSO) 89.4%, VI (PTT) 86.8%, and VII (PTT dye) 66.3%. Conclusions: The commercially available PDT and PTT adjuvant treatment systems were associated with the largest statistically significant reduction in periopathogenic bacteria on implant surfaces. However, activation with laser light at a suitable wavelength is necessary to achieve the bactericidal effects. The use of curcumin as a photosensitizer for 445 nm laser irradiation did not lead to any improvement in antibacterial efficacy in comparison with rinsing with DMSO solution alone.
medicine, general & internal