Decontamination of Dental Implant Surfaces by the Er:YAG Laser Beam: A Comparative in Vitro Study of Various Protocols
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 1, 2026

Pilot In Vitro Study to Assess Cleaning Ability and Effects of Different Decontamination Methods on Implant Surfaces
Published on: November 21, 2025
Rima Nejem Wakim1, Melanie Namour2, Hoang Viet Nguyen3
1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Lebanese University, Beirut 27798, Lebanon. rimawbta@hotmail.com.
Abstract:
Oral rehabilitation with dental implants has revolutionized the field of dentistry and has been proven to be an effective procedure. However, the incidence of peri-implantitis has become an emerging concern. The efficacy of the decontamination of the implant surface, by means of lasers, is still controversial. Previous studies have revealed a reduction in osteoblast adhesion to carbon-contaminated implant surfaces. This in-vitro study aimed to evaluate the decontamination of failed implants by assessing the carbon proportion, after irradiation by low-energy erbium yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser (Er:YAG) (Fotona; 2940 nm, Ljubljana, Slovenia) for a single and for multiple passages, until getting a surface, free of organic matters; to find the appropriate procedure for dental-implant surface-decontamination. Ninety implants were used. Thirty sterile implants were kept as a negative control. Thirty failed implants were irradiated by the Er:YAG laser, for a single passage, and the other thirty, for multiple passages. The parameters used in our experiments were an irradiation energy of 50 mJ, frequency of 30 Hz, and an energy density of 3.76 J/cm². A sapphire tip, with a length of 8 mm, was used with concomitant water spray irrigation, under air 6 and water spray 4. Super short pulse mode (SSP) was of 50 μs; irradiation speed being 2 mm/s. We used energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) to evaluate the carbon proportion on the surfaces of the sterile implants, the contaminated, and the lased implants, with one (LX1) and with three passages (LX3). Statistical analysis was performed by ANOVA. Results showed mean difference between the three groups (contaminated, LX1, and LX3) with p < 0.0001, as between LX1 and Group A (p < 0.0001), while the difference between LX3 and the control group was not statistically significant. The decontamination of the implant surfaces with a low-energy Er:YAG laser with three passages, appeared to be an encouraging approach.
Related Concept Videos
Beams
Based on geometry, beams can be straight, tapered, or curved. Straight beams are the most common type and have a constant cross-section throughout their length. Tapered beams, on the other hand, have a varying cross-section along...
Deflection of a Beam
Singularity functions, described in an earlier lesson, are powerful mathematical tools that represent discontinuities within a function commonly encountered in structural loading...
Prismatic Beams: Problem Solving
The design begins with analyzing the beam as a free body to identify moments and force balances, thereby determining support reactions. Next, the...
Principal Stresses in a Beam
Analyzing principal stresses is crucial, especially in...
Beams with Symmetric Loadings
The M/EI...
Comparing Copy Number Variations and SNPs
Copy number variations or CNVs are the structural variations that cover more than 1kb of DNA sequence. The single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP), on the other hand, is a single nucleotide change or a point mutation that is found in more than 1%...

