Cavitation occurrence around ultrasonic dental scalers

Ultrasonic scalers are used in dentistry to remove calculus and other contaminants from teeth. One mechanism which may assist in the cleaning is cavitation generated in cooling water around the scaler. The vibratory motion of three designs of scaler tip in a water bath has been characterised by laser vibrometry, and compared with the spatial distribution of cavitation around the scaler tips observed using sonochemiluminescence from a luminol solution. The type of cavitation was confirmed by acoustic emission analysed by a 'Cavimeter' supplied by NPL. A node/antinode vibration pattern was observed, with the maximum displacement of each type of tip occurring at the free end. High levels of cavitation activity occurred in areas surrounding the vibration antinodes, although minimal levels were observed at the free end of the tip. There was also good correlation between vibration amplitude and sonochemiluminescence at other points along the scaler tip. 'Cavimeter' analysis correlated well with luminol observations, suggesting the presence of primarily transient cavitation.

Ultrasonic scaler oscillations and tooth-surface defects

Damage to tooth root surfaces may occur during ultrasonic cleaning with both piezoelectric and magnetostrictive ultrasonic scalers. It is unclear which mechanism causes more damage or how their mechanism of action leads to such damage. Our null hypothesis is that tooth-surface defect dimensions, resulting from instrumentation with ultrasonic scalers, are independent of whether the scaler probe is magnetostrictive or piezoelectric. Piezoelectric and magnetostrictive ultrasonic scaler probes were placed into contact against polished dentin samples (100 g/200 g). Resulting tooth surfaces were evaluated with a laser metrology system. Ultrasonic instrumentation produced an indentation directly related to the bodily movement of the probe as it made an impact on the surface. Load, generator power, and probe cross-section significantly affected probe vibration and defect depth/volume. Defect dimensions were independent of generator type. Magnetostrictive probes oscillated with greater displacement amplitudes than piezoelectric probes, but produced similar defects. This may be due to the cross-sectional shape of the probes.