Literature DB >> 30080320

The effect of osseodensification drilling for endosteal implants with different surface treatments: A study in sheep.

Bradley Lahens1, Christopher D Lopez1, Rodrigo F Neiva2, Michelle M Bowers1, Ryo Jimbo3, Estevam A Bonfante4, Jonathan Morcos1, Lukasz Witek1, Nick Tovar1, Paulo G Coelho1,5.   

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of osseodensification drilling on the stability and osseointegration of machine-cut and acid-etched endosteal implants in low-density bone. Twelve sheep received six implants inserted into the ilium, bilaterally (n = 36 acid-etched, and n = 36 as-machined). Individual animals received three implants of each surface, placed via different surgical techniques: (1) subtractive regular-drilling (R): 2.0 mm pilot, 3.2 and 3.8 mm twist drills); (2) osseodensification clockwise-drilling (CW): Densah Bur (Versah, Jackson, MI) 2.0 mm pilot, 2.8, and 3.8 mm multifluted tapered burs; and (3) osseodensification counterclockwise-drilling (CCW) Densah Bur 2.0 mm pilot, 2.8 mm, and 3.8 mm multifluted tapered burs. Insertion torque was higher in the CCW and CW-drilling compared to the R-drilling (p < 0.001). Bone-to-implant contact (BIC) was significantly higher for CW (p = 0.024) and CCW-drilling (p = 0.006) compared to the R-drilling technique. For CCW-osseodensification-drilling, no statistical difference between the acid-etched and machine-cut implants at both time points was observed for BIC and BAFO (bone-area-fraction-occupancy). Resorbed bone and bone forming precursors, preosteoblasts, were observed at 3-weeks. At 12-weeks, new bone formation was observed in all groups extending to the trabecular region. In low-density bone, endosteal implants inserted via osseodensification-drilling presented higher stability and no osseointegration impairments compared to subtractive regular-drilling technique, regardless of evaluation time or implant surface.
© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater 107B: 615-623, 2019. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bone; histologic; implant; insertion torque; osseodensification

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30080320     DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.34154

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater        ISSN: 1552-4973            Impact factor:   3.368


  3 in total

1.  Effect of osseodensification on the increase in ridge thickness and the prevention of buccal peri-implant defects: an in vitro randomized split mouth pilot study.

Authors:  Fausto Frizzera; Rubens Spin-Neto; Victor Padilha; Nicolas Nicchio; Bruna Ghiraldini; Fábio Bezerra; Elcio Marcantonio
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2022-06-13       Impact factor: 3.747

2.  The effect of osseodensification on implant stability and bone density: A prospective observational study.

Authors:  Aseel R Hindi; Salwan Y Bede
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2020-05-01

3.  Osseodensification effect on implants primary and secondary stability: Multicenter controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Edmara T P Bergamo; Abbas Zahoui; Raúl Bravo Barrera; Salah Huwais; Paulo G Coelho; Edward Dwayne Karateew; Estevam A Bonfante
Journal:  Clin Implant Dent Relat Res       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 3.932

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.