Cold Atmospheric Plasma, Dental Implants
Conditions
Keywords
Osseointegration, Surface modification, Cold atmospheric plasma
Brief summary
Cold plasma-mediated implant surface activation may reverse the biological aging of titanium by enhancing hydrophilicity and cellular response. The aim of this study was to clinically compare the effects of three different cold plasma systems on the stability of dental implants. In this prospective randomized controlled within-patient trial, a total of 44 implants were placed in 11 patients. In each patient, four implants were randomly allocated to one of the following groups: control, vacuum plasma, argon jet plasma, and cold atmospheric plasma. All implants were placed using a single-stage protocol with a minimum insertion torque of 45 Ncm. Implant stability was assessed using resonance frequency analysis (ISQ values) immediately after placement and at 2, 4, and 8 weeks.
Interventions
PROCEDUREDental implant placement
The dental implant was placed without any plasma application.
PROCEDUREDental implant placement and vacuum plasma application
The dental implant was placed with non-thermal low-pressure cold plasma application
PROCEDUREDental implant placement and argon jet plasma application
The dental implant was placed with argon jet plasma application
PROCEDUREDental implant placement and cold atmospheric plasma application
The dental implant was placed with cold atmospheric plasma application
Sponsors
Kahramanmaras Sutcu Imam University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Age ≥ 18 years. * Presence of edentulous areas requiring ≥4 implants for fixed prosthetic rehabilitation. * Good or moderate oral hygiene. * Adequate patient compliance to attend all follow-up appointments. * Willingness to voluntarily participate in the study.
Exclusion criteria
* Refusal to participate. * Need for alveolar ridge augmentation. * Systemic conditions that may impair healing (e.g., uncontrolled diabetes, immunodeficiency, ongoing chemotherapy or radiotherapy, history of head-and-neck radiotherapy, substance or alcohol abuse). * Untreated periodontal disease. * Heavy smoking (\>10 cigarettes/day). * Age \< 18 years.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Evaluation of Implant Stability | Measurements were performed at four different time points: • Immediately after placement (baseline), • 2 weeks, • 4 weeks, • 8 weeks. | The primary outcome measure was implant stability, quantified using Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) values obtained by resonance frequency analysis (RFA). Changes in mean ISQ values were assessed at four predefined time points across four different implant surface treatment groups. The secondary outcome measure was the early stability pattern, evaluated based on serial ISQ measurements recorded during the first 8 weeks following implant placement. |
Countries
Turkey (Türkiye)
Outcome results
None listed