Using Er:YAG laser to remove lithium disilicate crowns from zirconia implant abutments: An in vitro study

Janina Golob Deeb; Sompop Bencharit; Nishchal Dalal; Aous Abdulmajeed; Kinga Grzech-Leśniak

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0223924

Peer Review History

Original SubmissionJune 27, 2019
27 Aug 2019 Decision Letter - Yogendra Kumar Mishra, Editor PONE-D-19-18100 Using Er:YAG Laser to remove lithium disilicate crowns from zirconia implant abutments: an in vitro study PLOS ONE Dear Dr. Bencharit, Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that carefully addresses the points raised during the review process. We would appreciate receiving your revised manuscript by Oct 11 2019 11:59PM. When you are ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file. If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. To enhance the reproducibility of your results, we recommend that if applicable you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript: A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). This letter should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Response to Reviewers'. A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'. An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. This file should be uploaded as separate file and labeled 'Manuscript'. Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out. We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript. Kind regards, Yogendra Kumar Mishra, Ph. D. Academic Editor PLOS ONE Journal Requirements: 1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf 2. We noticed you have some minor occurrence of overlapping text with previous publications, which needs to be addressed. In your revision ensure you cite all your sources (including your own works), and quote or rephrase any duplicated text outside the methods section. Comments to the Author 1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ******** 2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 5. Review Comments to the Author Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters) Reviewer #1: In manuscript PONE-D-19-18100, Bencharit et al. evaluated Er:YAG laser to remove lithium disilicate crowns from zirconia implant abutments. The work is continuation of authors’ previous work on retrieval of lithium disilicate crowns from titanium implant abutments. The experiments are interesting and the results are well interpreted with statistical analysis. The manuscript is recommended for publication in PLOS One, however authors are suggested to include the p-values in table 1 and 2 instead of just reporting it as p< 0.001 for ANOVA test. Reviewer #2: The manuscript explains very well evaluate the effect of erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) laser as a non-invasive treatment modality to remove lithium disilicate crowns from zirconia implant abutments. This publication can be published, and requires minor revision with the focus on comments below: 1. The study is interesting, were there any short-term recementation and repeated recementation studies performed too? 2. The abbreviations need to be expanded when they appear in the text after the first time. 3. What was the rationale behind studying the temperature changes of the abutment and crown only upto 10 minutes? Views on beyond 10 min time point? 4. Please elaborate a little more on how Er:YAG laser usage, allows more reusage of lithium disilicate crowns. 5. Introduction First Paragraph, last line: Zirconia abutments offer white esthetics……Please explain white esthetics. 6. “Er:YAG lasers can retrieve cemented prosthesis a traumatically without damaging the abutment and prostheses”. Are there any future perspectives of employing Er:YAG lasers in other teeth and gums related diseases 6. Figures 3 and 4, please elaborate on the legend, and explain each quadrant as A) B) C) D) and their significance. 7. Grammatical errors and sentence errors should be corrected throughout the manuscript. 8. Authors insights or future perspective on in-vivo studies using Er:YAG lasers Overall it is a well written manuscript. Explaining clearly the importance of Er:YAG lasers. If Published, it will be of valuable importance. ****** 6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review?** For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy. Reviewer #1: No Reviewer #2: No [NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files to be viewed.] While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223924.r001
Revision 1
28 Aug 2019 Author Response Journal Requirements: 1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and http://www.journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf RESPONSE: The manuscript was amended per PLOS ONE’s style requirements. 2. We noticed you have some minor occurrence of overlapping text with previous publications, which needs to be addressed. In your revision ensure you cite all your sources (including your own works), and quote or rephrase any duplicated text outside the methods section. RESPONSE: The work is a follow up study from our previous work, Reference #22. The texts outside the methods were checked for potential plagiarism. Appropriate citations were made. Reviewer #1: In manuscript PONE-D-19-18100, Bencharit et al. evaluated Er:YAG laser to remove lithium disilicate crowns from zirconia implant abutments. The work is continuation of authors’ previous work on retrieval of lithium disilicate crowns from titanium implant abutments. The experiments are interesting and the results are well interpreted with statistical analysis. The manuscript is recommended for publication in PLOS One, however authors are suggested to include the p-values in table 1 and 2 instead of just reporting it as p< 0.001 for ANOVA test. RESPONSE: The authors truly appreciate this kind insight and comments from the reviewer. Please kindly find our explanation below. The calculated ANOVA value for Table 1 is 0.0000008534387269 and the calculated t-test values of LT-LTR, LT-LTRR, and LT-ST were 0.0008373721939, 0.0001817757697, 0.0001817757697, respective. However, we can only report as the p values as low as p < 0.001 per the conventional statistical report decimal point for the ANOVA, LT-LTR, LT-LTRR, and LT-ST. Reviewer #2: The manuscript explains very well evaluate the effect of erbium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) laser as a non-invasive treatment modality to remove lithium disilicate crowns from zirconia implant abutments. This publication can be published, and requires minor revision with the focus on comments below: 1. The study is interesting, were there any short-term recementation and repeated recementation studies performed too? RESPONSE: The authors appreciate this comment. However, in our experimental design, we attempted to mimic clinical situations when clinicians often do not attempt to repeated retrieval/cementation at the short-term cementation (ST). And if so, we assume that the retrieval time of the short-term repeated would be similar to the repeated long-term cementation (LTRR) since the ST and LTRR groups have no statistical difference between them (p=1). 2. The abbreviations need to be expanded when they appear in the text after the first time. RESPONSE: The authors appreciated this comment. Abbreviations, such as Er:YAG, Er,Cr:YSGG, ANOVA, CAD/CAM were explained at the first time mentioned in the maintext. 3. What was the rationale behind studying the temperature changes of the abutment and crown only upto 10 minutes? Views on beyond 10 min time point? RESPONSE: We appreciated this comment. The following rationale was added into the Discusson. “Note that the maximal time of abutment crown retrieval from a titanium implant from our previous study [22] here were 5 minutes. Therefore, we did 10 minutes to double the possible maximal time of irradiation and to keep the results comparable to our previous study [22]. We do not think that the clinician will ever need to do more then 5-10 minutes irradiation at a time (often it will only be 30-second to 3-minute interval).” 4. Please elaborate a little more on how Er:YAG laser usage, allows more reusage of lithium disilicate crowns. RESPONSE: This Is a truly great insight. The following statement was added at the beginning of the Discussion. “Clinically, removing a cemented lithium disilicate crown from an implant abutment can sometimes take over 30 to 60 minutes of dental chair time. More importantly, the conventional rotary instrument crown removal technique most of the time would render the lithium disilicate crown and often underlined zirconia abutment unreusable. Lithium disilicate and zirconia materials would often be chattered or cracked upon touching by a rotary instrument. Conventionally, when clinicians need to retrieve a cement-retained single implant restoration, it almost always resulting in remaking of the crown and/or the abutment. Therefore, there is a clear need for a more conservation approach of implant crown removal.” 5. Introduction First Paragraph, last line: Zirconia abutments offer white esthetics……Please explain white esthetics. RESPONSE: The clarification statement was added. The statements are now read as followed. “Conventionally, titanium abutments are often used as an intermediate between the dental implants. Like other metals, titanium abutments can exhibit greyness or dark shade through a translucent lithium disilicate crown. Zirconia abutments are therefore often prescribed to offer white esthetics. Zirconia abutments have therefore an advantage over the metal abutment especially in patients with thin gingival biotype.[2,3],[8],[9]” 6. “Er:YAG lasers can retrieve cemented prosthesis a traumatically without damaging the abutment and prostheses”. Are there any future perspectives of employing Er:YAG lasers in other teeth and gums related diseases. RESPONSE: The authors appreciated this comment. The following statement was added. “As previous mentioned in the introduction, Er:YAG laser has a wide range of applications including the treatment of peri-implantitis, chronic inflammation of hard of soft tissue around dental implants.[31-34] Er:YAG laser has been used to decontaminate implant surface by eliminating biofilm and allow more effective bone grafting for bone defects around dental implants.[31-34] It would be interesting to see if similar applications of this laser would alter biofilm formation on the restorative surface during crown retrieving. Future clinical studies in humans as well as studies with an artificial biofilm system may provide further insight into the application of Er:YAG laser in implant and restorative dentistry.” 6. Figures 3 and 4, please elaborate on the legend, and explain each quadrant as A) B) C) D) and their significance. RESPONSE: The figure legends were amended (top/bottom and left/right were used instead of A-D). Figure 3: SEM Images of lithium disilicate crown after irradiation at 500µm and 10µm scale, note intact surface with residual cement. Top left and right demonstrates undamage smooth lithium disilicate material with some residual cement 500µm scale. Bottom left and right demonstrates normal crystal structure of lithium disilicate at 10µm. Figure 4: SEM images zirconium abutment without irradiation and after irradiation at 200µm and 500µm scale. Note residual cement on intact abutment surface. Top left (500µm) and right (200µm) demonstrate area of zirconia abutment surface with residual cement. Bottom left (200µm) and right (500µm) demonstrates the area of zirconia abutment without residual cement. Note normal smooth surface without any noticeable damage of zirconia. 7. Grammatical errors and sentence errors should be corrected throughout the manuscript. RESPONSE: Corrections have been made. 8. Authors insights or future perspective on in-vivo studies using Er:YAG lasers RESPONSE: The following statement was added. “It would be interesting to see if similar applications of this laser would alter biofilm formation on the restorative surface during crown retrieving. Future clinical studies in humans as well as studies with an artificial biofilm system may provide further insight into the application of Er:YAG laser in implant and restorative dentistry.” Overall it is a well written manuscript. Explaining clearly the importance of Er:YAG lasers. If Published, it will be of valuable importance. RESPONSE: We appreciated this kind comment. Attachments Attachment Submitted filename: Reponse_to_Reviewers_PLoSONE_R1_08272019.docx https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223924.r002
2 Oct 2019 Decision Letter - Yogendra Kumar Mishra, Editor Using Er:YAG Laser to remove lithium disilicate crowns from zirconia implant abutments: an in vitro study PONE-D-19-18100R1 Dear Dr. Bencharit, We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it complies with all outstanding technical requirements. Within one week, you will receive an e-mail containing information on the amendments required prior to publication. When all required modifications have been addressed, you will receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will proceed to our production department and be scheduled for publication. Shortly after the formal acceptance letter is sent, an invoice for payment will follow. To ensure an efficient production and billing process, please log into Editorial Manager at https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the "Update My Information" link at the top of the page, and update your user information. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, you must inform our press team as soon as possible and no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org. With kind regards, Yogendra Kumar Mishra, Ph. D. Academic Editor PLOS ONE Additional Editor Comments (optional): Reviewers' comments: Reviewer's Responses to Questions Comments to the Author 1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation. Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed ******** 2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions? The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available? The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here. Reviewer #1: Yes Reviewer #2: Yes ****** 6. Review Comments to the Author Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters) Reviewer #1: The authors have addressed all the questions and manuscript is recommended to be accepted for publication. Reviewer #2: The authors have addressed the questions and comments, and have explained the queries very well. They have additionally made necessary changes and have met the requirements pointed in the comments section. ****** 7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files. If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public. Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review?** For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy. Reviewer #1: Reviewer #2: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223924.r003
Formally Accepted
25 Oct 2019 Acceptance Letter - Yogendra Kumar Mishra, Editor PONE-D-19-18100R1 Using Er:YAG Laser to remove lithium disilicate crowns from zirconia implant abutments: an in vitro study Dear Dr. Bencharit: I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department. If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper at this point, to enable them to help maximize its impact. If they will be preparing press materials for this manuscript, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org. For any other questions or concerns, please email plosone@plos.org. Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE. With kind regards, PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff on behalf of Dr. Yogendra Kumar Mishra Academic Editor PLOS ONE https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223924.r004

Open letter on the publication of peer review reports

PLOS recognizes the benefits of transparency in the peer review process. Therefore, we enable the publication of all of the content of peer review and author responses alongside final, published articles. Reviewers remain anonymous, unless they choose to reveal their names.

We encourage other journals to join us in this initiative. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, and research institutions, to recognize the benefits of published peer review reports for all parts of the research system.

Learn more at ASAPbio .