The effect of load on heat production, thermal effects and expenditure of time during implant site preparation – an experimental ex vivo comparison between piezosurgery and conventional drilling

Abstract

PS yields significantly higher temperatures and thermal tissue alterations on load levels higher than 500 g and is significantly slower for ISP compared to SB and TB. For ISP with PS, a maximum load of 400 g should be maintained.

Identification of possible factors influencing temperatures elevation during implant site preparation with piezoelectric technique

“…However, different literature data have been reported on this issue (23-25). Stelzle et al (26) observed a highest thermal impact in the cortical bone with both piezoelectric and rotating techniques supporting the hypothesis that cortical bone is more susceptible of temperature rise than cancellous bone. In the first set of osteotomies the highest mean values for ΔTmax occurred with IM1s (Tab.…”

“…Speed, pressure, irrigation and bur shape have been identified as some of the most important factors influencing temperatures rising (3). The impact of pressure and irrigation has been also investigated with respect to implant site preparation with piezoelectric instruments (26,27).…”

“…It has been documented that higher working loads induce a higher temperature elevation (26,28). The working load can affect temperature elevation in different ways such as increasing the efficiency of real contact area and thermal coupling between tip and bone surface.…”

“…However, it is still an issue of debate whether higher temperatures arise in cortical rather than in cancellous bone (24). The higher compactness of the cortical bone, requiring higher energies and more time for preparation, was pointed out in explanation of different thermal alteration reported in cortical and cancellous bone (26). Probably, different experimental conditions as well as the different thermal properties of cortical and cancellous bone (33,34) can explain the discordance of literature results.…”

Heat generation and drill wear during dental implant site preparation: systematic review

“…Currently, to our knowledge only 2 methods have been used to record the heat generated in real time. Thermocouples, which enable direct measurement, 3,5,7,13,[15][16][17][18]23,24,26,35 were first reported in implant dentistry by Horch and Keiditsch. 36 Infrared thermography provides an indirect estimate, 4,18,22,27 and measurements were first described by D'Hodet et al 37 Although thermocouple technology is well established, studies on its use are still not uniform (Table 1), and there are variations in the distance to the final cut (between 0.5 and 2 mm), configuration of the elements (from mono to tripod), and depths and numbers in the vertical dimension (monochannel and multichannel).…”