Bone stability around dental implants: Treatment related factors

Heinemann, Friedhelm; Hasan, Istabrak; Bourauel, Christoph; Biffar, Reiner; Mündt, Torsten

doi:10.1016/j.aanat.2015.02.004

Cited by 60 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These data are important because they substantially confirm what was reported in the current literature [4,10,11,[13][14][15][16]20]. In fact, in the present study, higher IT/ISQ values in implants with satisfactory high primary stability were found, as well as a positive linear correlation between the selected variables (IT and ISQ) for all implants and for implants with satisfactory high primary stability.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

“…Secondary stability comes from regeneration and remodeling of the bone and tissue around the implant after insertion, and it mainly depends on the micro/nanotopographical features of the implant [13][14][15][16][17][18][22][23][24]; however, it seems to be highly dependent on the primary stability [10,22,23].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In modern implantology, with the introduction of surgical and prosthetic protocols such as the immediate placement of implants in fresh postextraction sockets [19,[24][25][26] and immediate functional loading [19,20,27], it is very important to quantify implant stability at various timeframes, in order to have a long-term prognosis for the implants placed [10,[14][15][16][17][18]. Therefore, the employment of simple, clinically applicable noninvasive tests to assess implant stability and osseointegration can be considered valuable [12][13][14][15][16][17][18]23].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Implant stability in the posterior maxilla: a controlled clinical trial

Gomes¹

2017

http://isrctn.com/

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim. To evaluate the primary and secondary stability of implants in the posterior maxilla. Methods. Patients were allocated into three groups: (A) native bone, (B) partially regenerated bone, and (C) nearly totally regenerated bone. Insertion torque (IT) and implant stability quotient (ISQ) were measured at placement, to evaluate whether satisfactory high primary stability (IT ≥ 45 N/cm; ISQ ≥ 60) was achieved; ISQ was measured 15, 30, 45, and 60 days after placement, to investigate the evolution to secondary stability. Results. 133 implants (Anyridge5, Megagen) were installed in 59 patients: 55 fixtures were placed in Group A, 57 in Group B, and 21 in Group C. Fifty-two implants had satisfactory high primary stability (IT ≥ 45 N/cm; ISQ ≥ 60). A positive correlation was found between all variables (IT, ISQ at t = 0, t = 60), and statistically higher IT and ISQ values were found for implants with satisfactory high primary stability. Significant differences were found for IT and ISQ between the groups (A, B, and C); however, no drops were reported in the median ISQ values during the healing period. Conclusions. The evaluation of the primary and secondary implant stability may contribute to higher implant survival/success rates in critical areas, such as the regenerated posterior maxilla. The present study is registered in the ISRCTN registry with ID ISRCTN33469250.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Implant stability in the posterior maxilla: a controlled clinical trial

Gomes¹

2017

http://isrctn.com/

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Clinical studies shows that implants placed in the jaw present higher survival rates compared to the ones placed on the maxilla 8,9 , especially when considered the maxillary posterior region witch usually presents a thinner cortical bone combined with thicker trabecular bone 10 . Clinically, the quality and quantity of bone are local factors that cannot be controlled; whereas, surgical technique and implant design may be changed to adapt specific bone situations and improve insertion torque 1,11 . Several strategies have been proposed to improve implant insertion torque in low-density bone.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The insertion torque obtained during the surgical moment of implant placement is essential to improve the primary stability, and consequently, to generate a successful osseointegration, especially during the immediate loading procedure 1,2 . Primary stability is defined as the absence of implant movement achieved after implant placement, and it depends of the implant design, bone density and surgical preparation technique 3,4 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combining the effects of undersized drilling and bone density on implant insertion torque

Camargo

Nunes

Spazzin³

et al. 2017

Braz. J. Oral Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: This study evaluated the influence of surgical undersized drilling on insertion torque of an implant system at low bone density. Methods: Implant site preparations were made in two polyurethane foam blocks with different densities, where two preparation techniques were considered: Control group (C): conventional drilling, following the manufacturer's instructions; and Group (E): undersized drilling, experimental technique using a final surgical drill with reduced diameter. The artificial bone blocks were selected based on density: D 1 (0.64 g/cm 3 ) and D 2 (0.32 g/cm 3 ). Three groups were considered according to the preparation technique and bone density used (n=10): CD 1 -conventional drilling technique in artificial bone with higher density; CD 2 -conventional drilling technique in artificial bone with lower density; and ED 2 -undersized drilling in artificial bone with lower density. Externalhexagon implants (11 × 4 mm) were inserted and the insertion torque values were measured using a digital torque-meter. Data were submitted to one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's test (α=0.05). Results: The results showed significant statistical differences between groups (p<0.001), where the highest insertion torque was found for the Group CD 1 (48.9 Ncm) followed by Group ED 2 (22.6 Ncm) and Group CD 2 (11.7 Ncm). Conclusions: The undersized drilling technique for implant site preparation leads to increased insertion torque on low bone density.

show abstract