Relationship of implant stability and bone density derived from computerized tomography images

Merheb, Joe; Vercruyssen, Marjolein; Coucke, Wim; Quirynen, Marc

doi:10.1111/cid.12579

Cited by 35 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous clinical studies have also found that higher cortical bone thickness increases initial implant stability, which is in agreement with the present study ( 10 - 12 ). Cortical bone thickness is important for the implant primary stability and occlusal loading force dissipation to the peri-implant bone tissue, whereas trabecular bone is of considerable importance for peri-implant bone healing ( 13 , 14 ). It can therefore be suggested that cortical bone thickness is a valuable resource to increase primary stability when planning to immediately load a dental implant ( 13 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro evaluation of the influence of bone cortical thickness on the primary stability of conventional- and short-sized implants

Barros¹,

Silva²,

Camargos³

et al. 2022

J Clin Exp Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of the cortical thickness on the primary stability of short and conventional-sized implants with two types of prosthetic connection. Material and Methods Seventy-two implants were used. These implants were placed in polyurethane blocks that simulated low-density bone tissue (type IV bone), with two bone cortical heights (type I bone): 1mm and 3mm. The implants were divided into 6 groups with 12 implants each according to the type of prosthetic connections (external-hexagon -EH and morse taper- MT) and implant sizes (conventional- 4x10mm and short 5x5mm; 5.5x5mm; 5x6mm; 5.5x6mm). Insertion torque (IT) and resonance frequency analyzes (RFA) were performed to evaluate the primary stability of the implants. Results All implants installed in blocks with 3mm of cortical thickness showed greater IT than those installed in 1mm. The short-sized MT implants had a higher IT than conventional implants of the same connection. Short-sized EH implants showed less IT than short-sized MT implants in blocks with 3mm of cortical. In blocks with 1mm of cortical, conventional EH implants had a higher IT compared to short-sized EH implants. The conventional sized implants presented higher RFA values despite the thickness of the cortical in the blocks. Conclusions The greater bone cortical thickness and implants size provides greater primary stability of the implants regardless the prosthetic connection. Key words: Implants connection, implants macrostructure, primary stability.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro evaluation of the influence of bone cortical thickness on the primary stability of conventional- and short-sized implants

Barros¹,

Silva²,

Camargos³

et al. 2022

J Clin Exp Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The presence of osseointegration is clinically identified via the asymptomatic fixation of the implant to the surrounding bone, and histologically via direct contact between the bone and the implant without the interference of the soft tissue [8][9][10]. Various factors contribute to higher IPS values, such as bone quality and quantity [11], implant design [12,13], and surgical technique [14,15]. Also, systemic factors, such as age, metabolic diseases (diabetes, osteoporosis), and smoking can negatively influence secondary implant stability [16][17][18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…Of these, 47 were excluded from the analysis. Finally, 26 studies were included in this review, which consisted of 17 prospective cohort studies, eight retrospective cohort studies, and one non‐randomized controlled trial (Aksoy et al., 2009; Arisan et al., 2012; Bergkvist et al., 2010; Bruno et al., 2018; Chatvaratthana et al., 2017; Cortes et al., 2015; de Elío Oliveros et al., 2020; Farré‐Pagès et al., 2011; Hakim et al., 2019; Ikumi & Tsutsumi, 2005; Ivanova et al., 2021; Kim et al., 2021; Merheb et al., 2010, 2016, 2018; Mikic et al., 2021; Miyamoto et al., 2005; Schnitman & Hwang, 2011; Schnutenhaus et al., 2020; Sennerby et al., 2015; Song et al., 2009; Takechi et al., 2020; Tanaka et al., 2018; Tatli et al., 2014; Triches et al., 2019; Turkyilmaz & McGlumphy, 2008). A total of 3109 implants placed in 1171 were analyzed in this review.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, different bone properties were also present between the anterior and posterior regions(Morar et al, 2022). Several studies reported that higher PIS was found in implants placed in the mandible than in the maxilla(Farré-Pagès et al, 2011;Merheb et al, 2018;Tatli et al, 2014), which might be explained by the denser bone structure. Second, implant dimensions (length and diameter) might also contribute to PIS.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiographic alveolar bone assessment in correlation with primary implant stability: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Putra,

Cooray,

Nurrachman

et al. 2023

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe radiographic examination of alveolar bone using 3D radiographic examination is essential in dental implant treatment planning. Our study aimed to systematically review and quantitatively analyze the correlation between alveolar bone parameters, specifically bone density and cortical bone thickness, assessed using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and/or multidetector computed tomography (MDCT); and primary implant stability (PIS) determined using implant stability quotient (ISQ), Periotest® value (PTV), and insertion torque value (ITV).MethodsThis review was registered in the PROSPERO database (registration number CRD42022307245). An electronic literature search was conducted on the PubMed, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases for papers published until February 2022. The Quality Assessment in Prognostic Studies (QUIPS) tool was used to assess risk of bias. Meta‐analyses were conducted to calculate the estimated average correlation coefficient based on a multilevel random‐effects model, followed by subgroup analysis.ResultsTwenty‐six studies were included in this review, consisting of 17 prospective cohort studies, eight retrospective cohort studies, and one nonrandomized controlled trial. A total of 3109 implants placed in 1171 subjects were analyzed. Twenty‐three studies were evaluated using meta‐analysis. The alveolar bone condition was significantly correlated with ISQ (r = 0.60; p < .001), IT (r = 0.52; p < .001), and PTV (r = −0.42; p < .05).ConclusionAlveolar bone condition is significantly associated with PIS. Low bone density and thin cortical bone can lead to low PIS; therefore, modification of treatment planning and surgical procedures might be needed to avoid poor osseointegration.

show abstract

Relationship of implant stability and bone density derived from computerized tomography images

Abstract: Background and Purpose: Implant stability is one of the most important factors influencing

Cited by 35 publications

References 20 publications

In vitro evaluation of the influence of bone cortical thickness on the primary stability of conventional- and short-sized implants

In vitro evaluation of the influence of bone cortical thickness on the primary stability of conventional- and short-sized implants

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

Radiographic alveolar bone assessment in correlation with primary implant stability: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About