Comparative Evaluation of Osseodensification Versus Conventional Osteotomy Technique on Dental Implant Primary Stability: An Ex Vivo Study

Bandela, Vinod; Shetty, Neema; Munagapati, Bharathi; Basany, Ram B; Kanaparthi, Saraswathi

doi:10.7759/cureus.30843

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Using various analyzing techniques up to molecular levels, it has recently been proven that placing implants with high insertion torque leads to a zone of dead and dying osteocytes, resulting in microfractures of bone increasing bone resorption but decreasing new bone formation [24,25]. Insertion torque may be seen as a common denominator for assessing implant stability [13,26] and has been correlated with resonance frequency analysis [26] and damping capacity assessments [27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical Rationale for a Novel Implant Design Reducing Stress on Buccal Bone

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modern implant designs should allow for adequate primary stability but limit mechanical stress on buccal bone in order to prevent initial marginal bone loss. A dental implant characterized by a shift in core diameter and thread geometry was evaluated. Polyurethane foam was used as bone surrogate material and implant placement was performed measuring insertion torque and strain development on buccal bone using strain gauges as well as primary stability by using damping capacity assessments. An existing tapered bone-level implant was used as a control while the novel experimental implant described above (n = 10) was used in the test group. Statistical analysis was based on t-tests (α = 0.05). Both the maximum insertion torque (p = 0.0016) and maximum strain development in buccal bone (p = 0.1069) were greater in control implants as compared to the novel implant design. Moreover, in the control group, these were reached at a significantly later timepoint of the insertion process, i.e., when the implant was almost fully seated (maximum insertion torque p = 0.0001, maximum strain development p < 0.00001). The final insertion torque (p < 0.00001) and final strain development (p = 0.0137) were significantly lower in the novel implant design while the primary stability of both implant types did not differ significantly (p = 0.219). The novel implant design allowed for a greater undersizing of osteotomies while not mechanically overstressing buccal bone. Comparable primary stability was obtained from trabecular bone instead of compressing cortical bone as occurs in conventional, existing tapered implant designs.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical Rationale for a Novel Implant Design Reducing Stress on Buccal Bone

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected as the two osteotomy drilling methods were different. It was already revealed by both ex vivo studies, such as the ones performed by Slete et al 14 and Bandela et al 12 , as well as in the vivo study by Lahens et al 2 , IT and ISQ are important factors for implant success. Our results pointed to a better condition regarding the site preparation for implant installation when using the osseodensification technique which resulted in higher values of insertion torque.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…The PIS ( Figure 2 B) was assessed by the Osstell® Mentor (Osstell - Gothenburg - Sweden) with a SmartPeg Type 53 (Osstell - Gothenburg - Sweden) attached to each implant to determine the values of the implant stability quotient (ISQ). An arithmetic mean of the values referring to all the faces of the implant (anterior, posterior, medial, and distal) was obtained 12 .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing peri-implant bone microarchitecture: conventional vs. osseodensification drilling - ex vivo analysis

Bittar,

Sotto-Maior,

Devito

et al. 2024

Braz. Dent. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim was to evaluate primary implant stability and bone microarchitecture in two drilling situations, by comparing the conventional technique (CT) and osseodensification (OD) (Versah Burs - Jackson - Mississippi - USA). The implant insertion torque (IT), implant stability quotient (ISQ), and the peri-implant trabecular microstructure were assessed on bone fragments obtained from pig’s tibia (n=12), divided between CT (n=6) and OD (n=6). After the drilling procedure, the implants were installed (3.5x8.5 mm, Epikut - SIN - São Paulo - Brazil). The IT and ISQ were measured using a digital torque wrench and resonance frequency analysis. Then, the bone fragments containing the implants were removed with a trephine and analyzed by Microtomography (µCT, 8.0 µm). The comparison between groups was performed using the unpaired t-test (α=0.05). The results revealed that OD promotes a higher insertion torque (CT: 7.67±2.44 Ncm; OD: 19.78±5.26 Ncm) (p=0.0005), although ISQ was not different (CT: 61.33±4.66; OD: 63.25±4.58) (p=0.48). There was a significant increase in peri-implant bone volume (CT: 23.17±3.39 mm3; OD: 32.01±5.75 mm3) (p=0.008), and trabecular parameters: separation (CT: 0.4357±0.03 mm; OD: 0.3865±0.04 mm) (p=0.0449), number (CT: 1.626±0.18 1/mm; OD: 1.946±0.13 1/mm) (p=0.007), and thickness (CT: 0.1130±0.009 mm; OD: 0.1328±0.015 mm) (p=0.02). Structure model index (SMI) data demonstrate no significant differences between groups (CT: 1.7±0.2; OD: 1.4±0.4) (p=0.12). In conclusion, OD increases the insertion torque values and promotes beneficial changes regarding bone microarchitecture compared with CT, revealing more peri-implant bone volume with consequent higher primary stability.

show abstract

“…RFA is primarily focused on the resonance frequency of the implantbone complex at the time of implant placement. This method is perhaps costly and skill-dependent [35,36].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Assessment of Primary Implant Stability Using Osseodensification vs. Conventional Drilling Methods: A Systematic Review

Althobaiti,

Ashour,

Halteet

et al. 2023

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Osseodensification is a novel biomechanical bone preparation technique that has been established to replace conventional bone drilling and therefore will optimize the implant site. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the implant stability obtained by osseodensification drilling to those associated with conventional drilling techniques. An electronic search was performed in the PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Cochrane Oral Health Group, and Dentistry and Oral Science Source databases searched through Elton B. Stephens Company (EBSCO) for potentially relevant publications in the English language from January 2013 to December 2022. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs), contrasting osseodensification drilling with conventional drilling, studies documenting implant stability quotient (ISQ), and studies reporting the immediate outcome and at least three months of follow-up after dental implant placement were included. Two independent investigators evaluated the quality of the reviewed studies to determine the risk of bias using the version 2 of Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB) tool for RCTs (RoB 2) and RoB for NRSIs (ROBINS-I). Majority of the studies showed that bone density was significantly higher in the osseodensification group. The overall RoB for the NRSIs was reported to be low with respect to confounding, selection, classification, incomplete data, deviance from interventions, outcome evaluation, and selective reporting. The quality assessment of the RCT studies included in the review using the RoB 2 tool showed a high overall risk. The findings of the current review reveal that osseodensification drilling exhibited higher resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and ISQ values than conventional drilling protocols. Similarly, when osseodensification regions were contrasted with traditional drilling, bone density at the implant surface was augmented.

show abstract

Comparative Evaluation of Osseodensification Versus Conventional Osteotomy Technique on Dental Implant Primary Stability: An Ex Vivo Study

Cited by 5 publications

References 29 publications

Biomechanical Rationale for a Novel Implant Design Reducing Stress on Buccal Bone

Biomechanical Rationale for a Novel Implant Design Reducing Stress on Buccal Bone

Assessing peri-implant bone microarchitecture: conventional vs. osseodensification drilling - ex vivo analysis

A Comparative Assessment of Primary Implant Stability Using Osseodensification vs. Conventional Drilling Methods: A Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About