Dataset Information

Under-Drilling versus Hybrid Osseodensification Technique: Differences in Implant Primary Stability and Bone Density of the Implant Bed Walls.

ABSTRACT: The goal of this study was to evaluate the effects of two implant bed preparation techniques on the implant primary stability (IPS) and the bone density of the implant site. We completed 40 implant bed osteotomies in pig ribs using two techniques: osseodensification (OD) plus under-drilling (UD) with universal osseodensification drills (Test A), and under-drilling alone with drills of the same implant system (Test B). Implants with a 4.1 mm diameter and 10 mm length were inserted, and the IPS was evaluated with three methods: (insertion torque (IT), periotest (PTV), and resonance frequency analysis (RFA). The bone density was evaluated using micro-computed tomography. ANOVA and Tukey's post-hoc test were used for comparison of the IPS values, and Kruskal-Wallis was used to evaluate the bone density. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. The tested B technique (UD) achieved a higher IPS compared to the Test A technique (OD + UD) for all the evaluation methods (p < 0.05). Bone density was higher at the apical and middle region in Test A compared to Test B and control sites (p < 0.05). We concluded that although the bone density increased with the hybrid OD technique with universal drills, implant beds prepared with UD using drills with geometry similar to that of the implant are more efficient at increasing IPS values.

SUBMITTER: Delgado-Ruiz R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7013970 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Under-Drilling versus Hybrid Osseodensification Technique: Differences in Implant Primary Stability and Bone Density of the Implant Bed Walls.

Delgado-Ruiz Rafael R Gold Joshua J Somohano Marquez Tanya T Romanos Georgios G

Materials (Basel, Switzerland) 20200115 2

The goal of this study was to evaluate the effects of two implant bed preparation techniques on the implant primary stability (IPS) and the bone density of the implant site. We completed 40 implant bed osteotomies in pig ribs using two techniques: osseodensification (OD) plus under-drilling (UD) with universal osseodensification drills (Test A), and under-drilling alone with drills of the same implant system (Test B). Implants with a 4.1 mm diameter and 10 mm length were inserted, and the IPS wa ...[more]

PMID: 31952138

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:An in vitro study was made to compare mean thermal variation according to the material, design and wear of the surgical drills used during dental implant site preparation. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Three study groups (stainless steel drills with straight blades; diamond-like carbon-coated drills with straight blades; and diamond-like carbon-coated drills with twisted blades) were tested to compare material, design and wear of the surgical drill in terms of overall mean values (complete sequence of drills) and specific mean values (each drill separately). The groups comprised four drills: initial, pilot, progressive and final drill. Implant site configuration was performed through an intermittent and gradual drilling technique without irrigation at 800 rpm in standardized synthetic blocks. Maximum axial loading of two kilograms was controlled by an automatic press. Each surgical drill was submitted to 50 drillings and was sterilized every five uses. A thermographic camera analyzed the mean thermal changes. The software-controlled automatic press kept systematic drilling, axial loading and operational speed constant without any human intervention. Student's t-test, ANOVA and multiple linear regression models were performed. The level of significance was 5% (p = 0.05). RESULTS:The overall mean comparison between the stainless steel and diamond-like carbon-coated materials showed no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05), though specific mean comparison showed statistically significant differences between the drills of the different groups (p < 0.05). The twisted blades exhibited less overall and specific mean thermal variation than straight blades for the progressive and final drills (p < 0.01). In addition, the initial and pilot drills showed a greater mean thermal change than the progressive and final drills. The mean thermal variation was seen to increase during the 50 drillings. CONCLUSIONS:Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that the drill material did not significantly influence the overall mean thermal variation except for the pilot drill. The drill design affected overall and specific mean thermal variation since the twisted blades heated less than the straight blades. The initial and pilot drills increased the specific mean thermal variation with respect to the progressive and final drills. In addition, all drills in each group produced a gradual increase in mean temperature during the 50 drillings.

Project description:Introduction:When the era of dental implantology began, the pioneers defined some gold standards used in dental prosthetics treatment for implant-supported restorations. Referring to traditional prosthetics, it was taken for granted that the length of an implant placed in the alveolar bone (the equivalent of the root) should exceed the length of the superstructure. Aim of the Study:The aim of the study was to determine whether implant length and the crown-to-implant (C/I) ratio influence implant stability and the loss of the surrounding marginal bone and whether short implants can be used instead of sinus augmentation procedures. Material and Methods:The patients participating in the study (n = 30) had one single tooth implant, a short (OsseoSpeed™ L6 Ø4?mm, Implants) or a regular implant (OsseoSpeed L11 and L13 Ø4?mm, DENTSPLY Implants), placed in the maxilla. The evaluation was based on clinical and radiological examination. The crown-to-implant ratio was determined by dividing the length of the crown together with the abutment by the length of the implant placed crestally. Mean crown-to-implant ratios were calculated separately for each group and its correlation with the MBL (marginal bone loss) and stability was assessed. The authors compared the correlation between the C/I ratio values, MBL, and secondary implant stability. Results:Positive results in terms of primary and secondary stability were achieved with both (short and conventional) implants. The MBL was low for short and conventional implants being 0.34 ± 0.24?mm and 0.22 ± 0.46?mm, respectively. No significant correlation was found between the C/I ratio and secondary stability as well as the C/I ratio and the marginal bone loss. Conclusions:Short implants can be successfully used to support single crowns. The study has revealed no significant differences in the clinical performance of prosthetic restorations supported by short implants. Clinical trial registration number is NCT03471000.

Dataset Information

Under-Drilling versus Hybrid Osseodensification Technique: Differences in Implant Primary Stability and Bone Density of the Implant Bed Walls.

Publications

Under-Drilling versus Hybrid Osseodensification Technique: Differences in Implant Primary Stability and Bone Density of the Implant Bed Walls.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets