Skip to content

Decontamination of titanium implants using physical methods

  • by garon@biomomentum.com

Ashwaq A. Al‐Hashedi; Marco Laurenti; Veronique Benhamou; Faleh Tamimi
Clinical Oral Implants Research 28 (2017), 1013–1021, DOI . Exact publisher-layout PDF title/authors/full original structured abstract and methods visually verified, PDF pp.1–2. Published issue year retained; acceptance date 3 June 2016 is not used as a publication day. Mach-1 role is calibration/control of cleaning force before each procedure; no tensile, shear, indentation or fixture-only classification inferred. Custom Material denotes titanium discs, not biological human tissue from volunteers. Documented guide v1.3 calibration exception: no standard testing-configuration relation is asserted because none is established. Complete original abstract copied without paraphrase.

https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12914

73 citations · 12 in 2025–2026

Objectives: Current decontamination methods of titanium (Ti) implant present limited success in achieving predictable re-osseointegration. We hypothesized that even though these techniques could be useful in elimination of bacteria, they might be unsuccessful in removing organic contaminants and restoring the original surface composition. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of four decontamination methods on the surface chemistry and bacterial load of biofilm- contaminated implant surfaces in order to improve implant surface decontamination. Material and methods: The ability of clinically available methods such as metal and plastic curettes, Ti brushes and Er: YAG laser to decontaminate Ti implant surfaces was assessed. Surface morphology, chemical composition and properties of machined Ti discs (Ø 5.0 and 1.0 mm thick) were analysed before and after oral biofilm contamination using scanning electron microscope and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. The presence and viability of bacteria were evaluated with live – dead assays. Results: Biofilm contamination created an organic layer rich in hydrocarbons and bacteria that covered entirely the Ti surfaces. This organic layer has tightly adhered to Ti surfaces and could not be completely removed with any of the methods assessed. Ti brushes achieved greater elimination of organic contaminants and bacteria than curettes and Er: YAG laser; however, none of them was able to restore the original surface chemistry. Alternatively, Er: YAG laser-treated surfaces showed the lowest live-to-dead bacterial ratio. Conclusions: Ti brushes were more effective than curettes (metal or plastic) and Er: YAG laser in decontaminating Ti implant surfaces, although none of these techniques was able to completely eliminate surface contamination. Er: YAG laser was more effective than curettes and Ti brushes in killing the biofilm bacteria.

Equipment used

A Mach-1 calibrated and controlled the 0.23 ± 0.05 N force used with curettes and titanium brushes before each implant-cleaning procedure. The samples were titanium discs. This is force calibration; the paper does not establish a standard Mach-1 material-test configuration. Surface analysis used separate SEM and XPS systems.

Materials (1)

See Research in Action

Explore case studies

Report a problem with this page

Your email is used only to follow up on this report.

Screenshots (optional)

Click this area and paste a screenshot, or drag files here. Up to 3 PNG, JPEG or WebP images; 5 MB per image. Hide confidential information first.

Please do not include passwords or customer information. Reports and screenshots are private.