Search

Purpose: Recent studies indicate that reusing healing abutments (HAs) may pose a risk of biomaterial cross contamination among patients. The intent is to investigate whether postgraduate periodontics residency programs in the United States are reusing dental implant HAs and determine if there is a standardization in the decontamination and sterilization protocol of used HAs., Methods: An electronic survey consisting of-seven multiple choice and/or short answer questions pertaining to the re-use of HAs among postdoctoral periodontics programs was sent to program directors of 57 accredited dental schools in the United States via an online survey system (Qualtrics). Three follow-up remainder emails were sent to programs that did not respond after over a 6-month period. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics., Results: Of the 57 postdoctoral periodontics program directors contacted, only 14 responded with three programs (3/14, 21%) reported reusing HAs. Approximately, 46% stated their residents place dental implants in two stages, while ∼54% stated they used a one-stage protocol indicating varied time exposure of HA to the oral cavity. Even in a two-stage protocol, the extended time HA remained in situ varied from 4 weeks to 6 months. Each program reusing HAs employed a distinct decontamination approach highlighting a notable lack of standardization in practices., Conclusion: The findings from our study suggest that a minority of residency programs in the United States are reusing HAs. However, the limited number of responses leaves uncertainty regarding whether our findings underestimate the prevalence of this practice and accurately reflect the reality. Among those re-using HAs, there seems to be a lack of standardization in their decontamination, potentially leading to cross-contamination of residual biomaterial among patients., (© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Dental Education published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Dental Education Association.)

Purpose: To investigate various cleaning protocols employed to enable the reuse of healing abutments in the past decade., Materials and Methods: The review followed the guidelines set out in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement, with guidance from the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook. Electronic searching and handsearching were performed using the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE via PubMed) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 2010 to July 2022, respectively. Studies published in English were evaluated. Two independent examiners conducted the search and the review process. The risk of bias of the included studies was evaluated., Results: In total, 178 articles were evaluated for review, but only 15 of them were selected for full-text reading. Regarding cleaning efficacy, chemical decontamination using sodium hypochlorite produced better results than laser and mechanical decontamination with airflow. Similar efficacy was found between chemical and electrochemical decontamination. Combined use of chemical and electrochemical decontamination protocols demonstrated the greatest efficacy. Chemical and electrochemical decontamination methods were found to achieve better outcomes in preserving the surface properties of decontaminated healing abutments than laser and mechanical methods., Conclusion: The present review found that combined decontamination protocols (chemical, electrochemical processing and autoclave treatment) are favourable for obtaining healing abutments with optimally cleaned surfaces. Moreover, healing abutments located in an area that is difficult to access can be cleaned without affecting the surface properties. This information could benefit researchers and clinicians when multiple-use healing abutments are considered.

Introduction: Although healing abutments are designated for single use by most implant manufacturers, it is common practice for clinicians to reuse healing abutments. However, there is a lack of adequate references that describe detailed sterilization protocols for reuse of healing abutments., Objectives: The purpose of this systematic review was to compile, organize, and describe the most common techniques for the sterilization of healing abutments and their efficiency in eliminating traces of microorganisms., Methods: An electronic search in 5 different databases was performed, including the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE via PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Google Scholar from January 2000 to December 2020. Search variables included were dental implant, healing abutment, contaminate, contamination, reuse, and sterilization. Studies reporting with a minimum sample size of 10 healing abutments (5 per group) published in the English language were evaluated. Risk of bias assessment was elaborated for included investigations., Results: In total, 812 articles were identified, of which 8 were included in the analysis. Steam autoclave was the most widely used form of resterilization. Not a single protocol, however, was able to achieve 100% virgin surface of the healing abutments., Conclusion: Although reuse of dental implant healing abutments is a cost-effective measure in dental practice, thorough surface decontamination followed by resterilization is highly recommended before reuse., Knowledge Transfer Statement: With consideration of cost and patient preference, results of this review would be useful in knowing various sterilization protocols for reusing healing abutments that could lead to more appropriate therapeutic decisions.