R González-García1, F Monje, C Moreno-García. 1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital Infanta Cristina, Badajoz, Spain. raulmaxilo@gmail.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dental primary implant stability is considered essential in the success of the osseointegration process. The recent advent of the resonance frequency analysis (RFA) seems to effectively measure primary implant stability, although its relationship with implant survival has to be further established. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy patients with complete mandibular edentulism underwent dental implant rehabilitation by means of the placement of 68 dental implants within the interforaminal region and subsequent placement of an overdenture. Primary implant stability was measured by means of RFA and it was expressed in terms of implant stability quotient (ISQ) on the day of the implant insertion and at the time of the healing abutment placement in a conventional implant two-stage surgical procedure. RESULTS: Overall implant survival rate was 97.1% at the end of the follow-up period. The mean ISQ value for 3.75 and 4.25 mm diameter implants was 78.4 ± 5.46 and 80.83 ± 5.35 respectively, at the time of the implant placement; and 76.68 ± 4.34 and 78.22 ± 6.87 respectively, at the second surgical stage. No statistical differences were observed in relation to changes in mean ISQ value along the healing process. CONCLUSIONS: No statistical differences in terms of primary and secondary implant stability measured by RFA exists between 3.75 mm and 4.25 mm diameter implants in the conventional implant two-stage surgical procedure in patients with non-atrophied edentulous mandible being restored with an overdenture. Furthermore, no statistical association between RFA and the implant insertion torque was observed for endosseous dental implant placement at the first surgical stage.
BACKGROUND: Dental primary implant stability is considered essential in the success of the osseointegration process. The recent advent of the resonance frequency analysis (RFA) seems to effectively measure primary implant stability, although its relationship with implant survival has to be further established. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy patients with complete mandibular edentulism underwent dental implant rehabilitation by means of the placement of 68 dental implants within the interforaminal region and subsequent placement of an overdenture. Primary implant stability was measured by means of RFA and it was expressed in terms of implant stability quotient (ISQ) on the day of the implant insertion and at the time of the healing abutment placement in a conventional implant two-stage surgical procedure. RESULTS: Overall implant survival rate was 97.1% at the end of the follow-up period. The mean ISQ value for 3.75 and 4.25 mm diameter implants was 78.4 ± 5.46 and 80.83 ± 5.35 respectively, at the time of the implant placement; and 76.68 ± 4.34 and 78.22 ± 6.87 respectively, at the second surgical stage. No statistical differences were observed in relation to changes in mean ISQ value along the healing process. CONCLUSIONS: No statistical differences in terms of primary and secondary implant stability measured by RFA exists between 3.75 mm and 4.25 mm diameter implants in the conventional implant two-stage surgical procedure in patients with non-atrophied edentulous mandible being restored with an overdenture. Furthermore, no statistical association between RFA and the implant insertion torque was observed for endosseous dental implant placement at the first surgical stage.
Authors: Alberto Monje; Florencio Monje; Fernando Suarez; Raúl González-García; Laura Villanueva-Alcojol; Agustín Garcia-Nogales; Pablo Galindo-Moreno; Hom-Lay Wang Journal: Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal Date: 2013-05-01