Mahalakshmi Gujjalapudi1, Chandrasekar Anam2, Praveen Mamidi3, Radha Chiluka4, A Gautam Kumar5, Ragini Bibinagar4. 1. Assistant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Government Dental College , Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh, India . 2. Professor and Head, Department of Prosthodontics, SVS Dental College , Mahabubnagar, Telangana, India . 3. Professor and Head, Department of Prosthodontics, PMVIDS and RC , Hyderabad, Telangana, India . 4. Senior Lecturer, Department of Prosthodontics, PMVIDS and RC , Hyderabad, Telangana, India . 5. Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, PMVIDS and RC , Hyderabad, Telangana, India .
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: After implant placement, a stress-free healing period of 3-6 months is a pre-requisite to achieve good osseointegration. If this duration could be reduced, the patients would feel happier. Eventhough, immediate loading of implants is a clinically feasible concept; it is not possible in certain situations. Few studies have shown that Static magnetic field is useful to promote bone formation faster after the bone is wounded. AIM: This pilot study was intended to evaluate the tissue response after implant placement under the influence of magnetic field. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty Tidal Spiral implants were used for this study. Two implants were placed in each patient in the anterior mandible corresponding to the B and D regions and the implant on the D region was exposed to magnetic field using safer magnet (Neodymium Boron Iron) and the implant on the B region served as a control. Both the implants were compared for stability using Resonance Frequency Analyzer (RFA) at Days 0, 30, 60 and 90. Mean Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) values were compared on both sides using student's paired t-test and repeated measures ANOVA (analysis of variance). There was a significant difference in the mean ISQ values, hence, a post-hoc test was done to evaluate whether there is any difference between the follow-ups. RESULTS: The average ISQ value for implants at 0 day in the B and D regions was 68.6 and 68.7 respectively. The average ISQ value at 30th day, 60th day and 90th day was 73.25, 76.05 and 78.95 respectively on the magnetic side (D region). Whereas on the non-magnetic side (B region) at 30th day, 60th day and 90th day was 68.45, 72.05 and 74.45 respectively. CONCLUSION: The implant stability quotient values obtained on the magnetic side were significantly greater than on the non-magnetic side. Positive correlation exists between the magnetic field and osseointegration.
INTRODUCTION: After implant placement, a stress-free healing period of 3-6 months is a pre-requisite to achieve good osseointegration. If this duration could be reduced, the patients would feel happier. Eventhough, immediate loading of implants is a clinically feasible concept; it is not possible in certain situations. Few studies have shown that Static magnetic field is useful to promote bone formation faster after the bone is wounded. AIM: This pilot study was intended to evaluate the tissue response after implant placement under the influence of magnetic field. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty Tidal Spiral implants were used for this study. Two implants were placed in each patient in the anterior mandible corresponding to the B and D regions and the implant on the D region was exposed to magnetic field using safer magnet (Neodymium Boron Iron) and the implant on the B region served as a control. Both the implants were compared for stability using Resonance Frequency Analyzer (RFA) at Days 0, 30, 60 and 90. Mean Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ) values were compared on both sides using student's paired t-test and repeated measures ANOVA (analysis of variance). There was a significant difference in the mean ISQ values, hence, a post-hoc test was done to evaluate whether there is any difference between the follow-ups. RESULTS: The average ISQ value for implants at 0 day in the B and D regions was 68.6 and 68.7 respectively. The average ISQ value at 30th day, 60th day and 90th day was 73.25, 76.05 and 78.95 respectively on the magnetic side (D region). Whereas on the non-magnetic side (B region) at 30th day, 60th day and 90th day was 68.45, 72.05 and 74.45 respectively. CONCLUSION: The implant stability quotient values obtained on the magnetic side were significantly greater than on the non-magnetic side. Positive correlation exists between the magnetic field and osseointegration.
Entities:
Keywords:
Endosseous Implants; Magnets; Osseointegration; Resonance frequency analyzer