Khalid E El-Kholey1, Saravanan Ramasamy2, Sheetal Kumar R2, Aamna Elkomy3. 1. Lecturer, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Ain-Shames University Hospitals. El-Kholey is now an Associate Professor and Head of Oral Surgery Department, IbnSina College for Medical Studies, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. 2. Assistant Professor, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, IbnSina College for Medical Studies, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. 3. Dentist, Ain Shames University Hospitals Cairo, Egypt.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To test the hypothesis that there would be no difference in heat production by reducing the number of drills during the implant site preparation relative to conventional drilling sequence. METHODS: A total of 120 implant site preparations with 3 different diameters (3.6, 4.3, and 4.6 mm) were performed on bovine ribs. Within the same diameter group, half of the preparations were performed by a simplified drilling procedure (pilot drill + final diameter drill) and other half using the conventional drilling protocol (pilot drill followed by graduated series of drills to widen the site). Heat production by different drilling techniques was evaluated by measuring the bone temperature using k-type thermocouple and a sensitive thermometer before and after each drill. RESULTS: Mean for maximum temperature increase during site preparation of the 3.6, 4.3, and 4.6-mm implants was 2.45, 2.60, and 2.95° when the site was prepared by the simplified procedure, whereas it was 2.85, 3.10, and 3.60° for the sites prepared by the conventional technique, respectively. No significant difference in temperature increase was found when implants of the 3 different diameters were prepared either by the conventional or simplified drilling procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The simplified drilling technique produced similar amount of heat comparable to the conventional technique that proved the initial hypothesis.
OBJECTIVES: To test the hypothesis that there would be no difference in heat production by reducing the number of drills during the implant site preparation relative to conventional drilling sequence. METHODS: A total of 120 implant site preparations with 3 different diameters (3.6, 4.3, and 4.6 mm) were performed on bovine ribs. Within the same diameter group, half of the preparations were performed by a simplified drilling procedure (pilot drill + final diameter drill) and other half using the conventional drilling protocol (pilot drill followed by graduated series of drills to widen the site). Heat production by different drilling techniques was evaluated by measuring the bone temperature using k-type thermocouple and a sensitive thermometer before and after each drill. RESULTS: Mean for maximum temperature increase during site preparation of the 3.6, 4.3, and 4.6-mm implants was 2.45, 2.60, and 2.95° when the site was prepared by the simplified procedure, whereas it was 2.85, 3.10, and 3.60° for the sites prepared by the conventional technique, respectively. No significant difference in temperature increase was found when implants of the 3 different diameters were prepared either by the conventional or simplified drilling procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The simplified drilling technique produced similar amount of heat comparable to the conventional technique that proved the initial hypothesis.