Objectives Bone density seems to be an important factor affecting implant stability. The relationship between bone density and primary and secondary stability remains under debate. The aim of this study was to compare primary and secondary stability measured by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) between different bone types and to compare implant stability at different time points during 3 months of follow-up. Materials and Methods Our study included 65 implants (BioHorizons Implant Systems) with 3.8 or 4.6 mm diameter and 9 or 10.5 mm length in 59 patients. Bone quality was assessed by Lekholm-Zarb classification. After implant insertion, stability was measured by an Osstell device using RFA at three follow-up visits (immediately, 1 month, and 3 months after implant insertion). ANOVA test was used to compare primary and secondary stability between different bone types and between the three time points for each density type. Results There were 9 patients in type I, 18 patients in type II, 20 patients in type III, and 12 patients in type IV. Three implants failed, 1 in type I and 2 in type IV. Stability values decreased in the first month but increased during the following two months in all bone types. Statistical analysis showed no significant difference between RFA values of different bone types at each follow-up or between stability values of each bone type at different time points. Conclusion According to our results, implant stability was not affected by bone density. It is difficult to reach a certain conclusion about the effect of bone density on implant stability as stability is affected by numerous factors.

Objective:To compare clinical results of three types of manual tooth brushes on plaque removal efficacy and gingivitis.Method:This study is a single blind randomized trial with crossover design which involved 30 periodontaly healthy individuals. Professional plaque removal and oral hygiene instruction were performed for all the participants in the first step of our study followed by asking them to avoid brushing for 2 days. Thereafter plaque and gingivitis scores were measured using plaque and gingival indices (PI and GI). Then subjects were instructed to use Pulsar tooth brush for a two-week period and then, GI and PI indices were assessed again. After passing one-week period for wash out, subjects didn't brush for 2 days and indices were recorded again. The same procedure was done for CrossAction, and Butler 411 tooth brushes respectively and at the end of the study these variables were analyzed using SPSS software ver.16. Repeated measurement ANOVA test was used to compare the scores between different brushes.Result:Finding of this study reveals that using all three types of tooth brushes resulted in significant plaque and gingivitis reduction compared to baseline levels. Pulsar tooth brush was significantly more effective in diminishing PI and GI than Butler tooth brush (p=0.044 and 0.031 respectively).Conclusion:According to our findings all 3 types of tooth brushes are effective in reduction of plaque and gingivitis and this reduction is significantly greater for Pulsar tooth brush compared to Butler and CrossAction tooth brushes.

Objectives: The stability of crestal bone has been reported as a major factor in the success of dental implants. Implants can be placed in an equicrestal (crestal) or subcrestal position. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of implant depth placement on marginal bone loss. Materials and Methods: The study was created in a split-mouth design. Immediately after implant surgery, digital parallel radiographs were prepared and levels of bone were measured where marginal bone loss and bone level changes occurred. These measurements were repeated at 3-month and 6-month follow-up periods. Results: In this interventional study, 49 implants were evaluated in 18 patients. Primary bone height was not significant between the intervention and control groups in both mesial and distal aspects at 3 months and 6 months from the baseline. The mean marginal bone loss on the mesial side was 1.03 mm in the subcrestal group and 0.83 mm in the crestal group. In addition, mean marginal bone loss on the distal side was 0.88 mm and 0.81 mm in the subcrestal and crestal groups, respectively. Marginal bone loss was not significantly different between sexes, the maxilla or mandible, and in the anterior or posterior regions as well as between different lengths and diameters of implants. Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, there was no significant difference in terms of marginal bone loss between crestal and subcrestal implants.

Purpose:The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the success rate of a chairside ridge augmentation procedure using bone autografts harvested with trephine drills and placed without the use of screws.Methods:Thirty patients were recruited for the study. After the surgical site was anesthetized and a crestal incision was made, an envelope flap was retracted using blunt dissection limited to the graft site, and the periosteum was raised intact and undamaged from the bone. The flap was extended laterally to obtain sufficient space for the bone graft. At the donor site, bone was obtained from the external oblique ridge area. A #5 or #6 trephine drill was used to harvest one or two pieces of bone. The bone blocks were placed inside the envelope flap at the recipient site, which was then sutured and covered with periodontal dressing. Antibiotics, analgesics, and mouthwash were prescribed. Measurements of ridge width were performed using CBCT before and 3 months after surgery. The pre- and post operative results were compared using paired t test.Results:Pre- and post-operative mean ridge widths were 2.23 ± 0.79 and 5.16 ± 0.68 mm, respectively. The mean increase in width was 2.92 ± 0.89 mm(P < 0.001).Conclusion:This non-invasive and simple technique provided an acceptable increase in ridge width. As the sample was small, we recommend further clinical investigation with larger samples to confirm that this technique may be used successfully as an alternative to current invasive augmentation methods.

Background. Early bone loss due to tooth extraction can be significantly reduced by socket preservation. The aim of this study was to compare the in vivo effects of hemihydrate calcium sulfate granules (an alloplastic material) and Cerabone (a bovine-derived xenograft) on socket preservation in dogs. Methods. Six male Mongrel dogs were randomly divided into 2 groups (n=3) for sacrificing and histological evaluation 4 and 8 weeks after a surgery. The second and third premolars on both sides of the lower jaw were extracted surgically. The sockets on one side were filled with Cerabone, and with calcium sulfate on the opposite side. In the slides, the ratio of the area of newly formed bone to the area of the entire cavity, and the ratio of the area of fibrous connective tissue to the area of the entire cavity were measured. The presence of inflammation was also examined. Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Sign test and McNemar test were used for statistical analyses (ɑ=0.05). Results. The means of new bone proportion were 11% and 8% for Cerabone and calcium sulfate, respectively (P=0.58). The means of connective tissue proportion were 29% and 33% for Cerabone and calcium sulfate, respectively (P=0.72). No inflammatory cells were observed in the Cerabone group, although 50% of the samples in the calcium sulfate group showed inflammation (P=0.50). Conclusion. The effects of calcium sulfate and Cerabone on socket preservation in dogs on bone formation, fibrous connective tissue and inflammation levels were not significantly different at 4- and 8-week postoperative intervals.