Omer Cohen1, Zeev Ormianer2, Haim Tal3, Daniel Rothamel4, Miron Weinreb5, Ofer Moses3. 1. Department of Periodontology and Dental Implantology, The Maurice and Gabriela Goldschleger School of Dental Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. omerco2@gmail.com. 2. Department of Oral Rehabilitation, School of Dental Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. 3. Department of Periodontology and Dental Implantology, The Maurice and Gabriela Goldschleger School of Dental Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. 4. Department of Oral and Maxillo-facial Plastic Surgery, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. 5. Department of Oral Biology, School of Dental Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to compare bone-to-implant contact (BIC) between implants inserted at high torque due to under-drilling of the crestal bone to those inserted at low torque due to over-drilling of the crestal bone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty implants with diameters of 3.75 mm (group A) or 3.55 mm (group B) were inserted in the proximal tibiae of NZW rabbits in two separate surgeries on day 0 or 21. Osteotomy of the crestal bone was finalized with a 3.65-mm drill. In group A, implants were inserted at torque ≥35 Ncm (under-drilling) and in group B with torque <10 Ncm (over-drilling). Implants and their surrounding bone were retrieved on day 42, thus creating 3- and 6-week observation periods, processed for non-decalcified histology and stained with toluidine blue. Crestal BIC (c-BIC) and total BIC (t-BIC) were measured. Wilcoxon test was used to evaluate differences between groups. RESULTS: Three weeks post-surgery, the mean c-BIC in group A was 16.3 ± 3.3 vs 31.5 ± 3.4 % in group B (P < 0.05). At 6 weeks, a similar trend was observed (group A: 28.7 ± 3.6 %; group B: 38.4 ± 4.9 %) (P > 0.05). No differences in t-BIC were noted at 3 weeks and at 6 weeks between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Insertion of implants with an over-drilling protocol of the crestal aspect of the osteotomy resulted in increased short-term crestal bone-to-implant contact. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Insertion of implants with a high torque following an under-drilling protocol, commonly used for immediate loading, may reduce crestal bone-to-implant contact at early healing stages.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to compare bone-to-implant contact (BIC) between implants inserted at high torque due to under-drilling of the crestal bone to those inserted at low torque due to over-drilling of the crestal bone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty implants with diameters of 3.75 mm (group A) or 3.55 mm (group B) were inserted in the proximal tibiae of NZW rabbits in two separate surgeries on day 0 or 21. Osteotomy of the crestal bone was finalized with a 3.65-mm drill. In group A, implants were inserted at torque ≥35 Ncm (under-drilling) and in group B with torque <10 Ncm (over-drilling). Implants and their surrounding bone were retrieved on day 42, thus creating 3- and 6-week observation periods, processed for non-decalcified histology and stained with toluidine blue. Crestal BIC (c-BIC) and total BIC (t-BIC) were measured. Wilcoxon test was used to evaluate differences between groups. RESULTS: Three weeks post-surgery, the mean c-BIC in group A was 16.3 ± 3.3 vs 31.5 ± 3.4 % in group B (P < 0.05). At 6 weeks, a similar trend was observed (group A: 28.7 ± 3.6 %; group B: 38.4 ± 4.9 %) (P > 0.05). No differences in t-BIC were noted at 3 weeks and at 6 weeks between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Insertion of implants with an over-drilling protocol of the crestal aspect of the osteotomy resulted in increased short-term crestal bone-to-implant contact. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Insertion of implants with a high torque following an under-drilling protocol, commonly used for immediate loading, may reduce crestal bone-to-implant contact at early healing stages.
Authors: Emeka Nkenke; Frank Kloss; Jörg Wiltfang; Stefan Schultze-Mosgau; Martin Radespiel-Tröger; Kerstin Loos; Friedrich Wilhelm Neukam Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 5.977
Authors: Paolo Trisi; Giorgio Perfetti; Edoardo Baldoni; Davide Berardi; Marco Colagiovanni; Giuseppe Scogna Journal: Clin Oral Implants Res Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 5.977
Authors: Anders Halldin; Ryo Jimbo; Carina B Johansson; Ann Wennerberg; Magnus Jacobsson; Tomas Albrektsson; Stig Hansson Journal: Bone Date: 2011-07-14 Impact factor: 4.398
Authors: Paulo G Coelho; Charles Marin; Hellen S Teixeira; Felipe E Campos; Julio B Gomes; Fernando Guastaldi; Rodolfo B Anchieta; Lucas Silveira; Estevam A Bonfante Journal: J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 1.895
Authors: Benedikt C Spies; Maria Bateli; Ghada Ben Rahal; Marin Christmann; Kirstin Vach; Ralf-Joachim Kohal Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2018-01-31 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Edgard El Chaar; Algirdas Puisys; Itai Sabbag; Benjamin Bellón; Aikaterini Georgantza; Wayne Kye; Benjamin E Pippenger Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2021-04-16 Impact factor: 3.573