Comparison of Crestal Bone Loss and Implant Stability Among the Implants Placed With Conventional Procedure and Using Osteotome Technique: A Clinical Study

Abstract

To overcome the limitations of implant placement in knife-edge ridges, Summer introduced the osteotome technique in 1994. It has been claimed that using bone condensing to prepare the implant site in soft maxillary bone avoids the risk of heat generation, and implants can be placed precisely with increased primary stability. The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the crestal bone loss exhibited by the bone around early nonfunctionally loaded implants placed with conventional implant placement technique and with Summer's osteotome technique and to evaluate whether the bone-compression technique provides better primary stability than the conventional technique. A total of 10 Uniti implants were placed in the maxillary anterior region of 5 patients. One implant site was prepared using the conventional technique with drills (control group A), and second site was prepared using the osteotome technique (experimental group B) and an MIS bone compression kit. Resonance frequency measurements (RFMs) were made on each implant at the time of fixture placement and on the 180th day after implant fixture placement. The peri-implant alveolar bone loss was evaluated radiographically. Differences between the alveolar crest and the implant shoulder in radiographs were obtained immediately after implant insertion and on the 180th day after implant placement. The RFMs demonstrated a significantly higher stability of implants in control group A than in experimental group B on the day of surgery (P = .026). However, no statistically significant difference in stability was found between both groups on 180th day after implant placement (P = .076). A significant difference was found in the crestal bone levels after 180 days of surgery between two groups (P = 0) with less crestal bone loss with group A. Within the limitations of this study we concluded that the osteotome technique is good for the purpose for which it was introduced, that is, for knife-edge ridges, and it should not be considered a substitute for conventional procedures for implant placement.