H Zeynep Ertugrul1, Donald J Pipko. 1. Prosthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15261-1920, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To our knowledge, it has not as yet been determined if mini-dental implants can be used as a long-term treatment method compared to endosseous standard root-form dental implant fixtures. This in vitro study investigates the stability of 2 different implants, 1 mini-dental implant and 1 endosseous standard root form dental implant, under lateral forces. METHODS: There were 2 different screw-type dental implants with the O-ring/ball attachment prosthetic heads used. A mini-dental implant (Sendax MDI MAX; IMTEC, Corp., Ardmore, OK) 13 mm in length and 2.2 mm in diameter, and root form implant (Brånemark; Nobel Biocare AB, Goteborg, Sweden) 13 mm in length and 4 mm in diameter. These implants were then embedded into a matrix mixture of pumice, two-fifths BaSO4 powder and one-fifth plaster. Parallel periapical radiographs were taken pretest and after lateral forces were applied. The implants were vibrated using electric toothbrushes. They were attached to O-rings on the implants. Periapical radiographs were secured periodically every 5 minutes. The first discrepancy was observed at the 35th minute. Mobility and discrepancy values were recorded at the instances of 35th, 60th, 90th, and 120th minutes. Stability was measured and recorded using a manual stress and tension gauge. Radiographic discrepancy values were measured using a stereomicroscope. RESULTS: The Brånemark implant showed less mobility and discrepancy values than the mini-dental implant. The discrepancies were observed mostly at the cervical region of the 2 implants. CONCLUSIONS: According to the experimental results of this study, the Brånemark implant was more stable than the mini-dental implant at the end of 2 minutes.
OBJECTIVES: To our knowledge, it has not as yet been determined if mini-dental implants can be used as a long-term treatment method compared to endosseous standard root-form dental implant fixtures. This in vitro study investigates the stability of 2 different implants, 1 mini-dental implant and 1 endosseous standard root form dental implant, under lateral forces. METHODS: There were 2 different screw-type dental implants with the O-ring/ball attachment prosthetic heads used. A mini-dental implant (Sendax MDI MAX; IMTEC, Corp., Ardmore, OK) 13 mm in length and 2.2 mm in diameter, and root form implant (Brånemark; Nobel Biocare AB, Goteborg, Sweden) 13 mm in length and 4 mm in diameter. These implants were then embedded into a matrix mixture of pumice, two-fifths BaSO4 powder and one-fifth plaster. Parallel periapical radiographs were taken pretest and after lateral forces were applied. The implants were vibrated using electric toothbrushes. They were attached to O-rings on the implants. Periapical radiographs were secured periodically every 5 minutes. The first discrepancy was observed at the 35th minute. Mobility and discrepancy values were recorded at the instances of 35th, 60th, 90th, and 120th minutes. Stability was measured and recorded using a manual stress and tension gauge. Radiographic discrepancy values were measured using a stereomicroscope. RESULTS: The Brånemark implant showed less mobility and discrepancy values than the mini-dental implant. The discrepancies were observed mostly at the cervical region of the 2 implants. CONCLUSIONS: According to the experimental results of this study, the Brånemark implant was more stable than the mini-dental implant at the end of 2 minutes.