Premium
Water coolant supply in relation to different ultrasonic scaler systems, tips and coolant settings
Author(s) -
Koster Tom J. G.,
Timmerman Mark F.,
Feilzer Albert J.,
Van der Velden Ubele,
Van der Weijden Fridus A.
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
journal of clinical periodontology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.456
H-Index - 151
eISSN - 1600-051X
pISSN - 0303-6979
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-051x.2008.01349.x
Subject(s) - coolant , materials science , environmental science , biomedical engineering , chemistry , mechanical engineering , medicine , engineering
Objective: This study evaluated “in vitro” the consistency of the water coolant supply for five ultrasonic scaler systems in relation to the tip type and different coolant settings. Material and Methods: The systems were: EMS PM‐400, EMS PM‐600, Satelec P‐max, Dürr Vector and Dentsply Cavitron. For each system, three units were used and on each unit various tips were tested. The tips were run unloaded for 1 min. at full and medium water supply setting. Results: At full water coolant setting, the PM‐400, PM‐600 and Cavitron supplied on average >45 ml/min. of water coolant (51.5, 46.3 and 46.9 ml/min., respectively). The P‐max supplied 25 ml/min. and the Vector supplied 4.9 ml/min. At medium setting, the PM‐400 and PM‐600 supplied approximately 50% of the volume given at the full coolant setting (25.0 and 26.3 ml/min., respectively). The Cavitron supplied approximately 40% at medium setting (18.2 ml/min.) and the P‐max supplied approximately 25% (5.7 ml/min.). Conclusion: The coolant control system of the different units did not provide a reliable indication of the water flow. Also, some perio tips gave less water coolant as compared with other tips of the same brand. Consequently, a change of tips during treatment may require adjustment of the water coolant supply.