Effect of chemical and electrochemical decontamination protocols on single and multiple‐used healing abutments: A comparative analysis of contact surface area, micro‐gap, micro‐leakage, and surface topography

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionAlthough the combined use of chemical and electrochemical decontamination protocols can completely remove contaminants from the surfaces of one‐time used healing abutments (HAs), their effectiveness in multiple‐used HAs remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the effect of reused HAs frequency on the implant‐HA contact surface area, micro‐gap, microleakage, and surface topography following chemical and combined chemical and electrochemical decontamination protocols.MethodsNinety bone level titanium implants were assembled with 90 bone level HAs, in which 80 contaminated HA samples were collected from human participants. The retrieved HAs were randomly divided into two groups according to the cleaning protocol: ultrasonication with 5.25% NaOCl solution for 15 min and steam autoclaving (group I); ultrasonication with 5.25% NaOCl solution for 15 min, followed by electrochemical cleaning and steam autoclaving (group II). The control group (group III) comprised 10 new unused HAs. The cleaning protocol was applied after each insertion as follows: (a) single‐use and cleaning, (b) double‐use and double cleaning cycles, (c) triple‐use and triple cleaning cycles, and (d) more than triple‐use and more than triple cleaning cycles. The contact surface area and micro‐gap were assessed with micro‐computed tomography scanning technique, microleakage test using 2% methylene blue staining, surface morphology with scanning electron microscopy, and surface elemental composition with energy‐dispersive X‐ray spectroscopy analysis.ResultsGroup Id exhibited the smallest contact surface area. The values of the micro‐gap volumes and microleakage were significantly different (p < 0.001) in the descending order of Id > Ic > Ib > IId > Ia, IIa, and III. Morphological evaluation of Groups IIa, IIb, and IIc revealed that residual biological debris was optimally removed without altering their surface properties.ConclusionsChemical and electrochemical decontamination protocols are more effective than NaOCl cleaning methods, particularly for multiple consecutive uses with better decontamination levels, which decreases micro‐gap volume and microleakage without surface alterations. Although the use of combined decontamination protocols for the contact surface area at the implant‐HA interface showed comparable results with the control, change in the contact surface area was observed following the NaOCl cleaning methods. Therefore, titanium HA reuse can be considered in multiple times, if they are cleaned and sterilized using combined chemical and electrochemical decontamination protocols.