Abstract
Heat generation is considered a decisive factor in the occurrence of bone necrosis during implant placement, which can happen when the temperature exceeds a threshold of 47°C for 1 min. The use of a surgical guide to aid implant placement has gained popularity in the last few years. Whether it increases the risk of bone necrosis is still debatable. The aim of the present study was to compare heat generation during implant placement with and without the use of a surgical guide. The study sample consisted of 80 measurement sites placed near 40 dental implant sockets, which were prepared on 10 bone-like dental models. These models were divided into 5 models for the conventional method group and 5 models for the surgical guide group. Each model had 4 implant sockets prepared, and then two 1-millimeter-wide holes were drilled <1 mm away from the socket on the opposite sides of the implant socket to be used as temperature measurement sites. The diameter of the drill was standardized to 2.2 mm, and 4 different drill lengths were used (6, 8, 10, and 12 mm). The data was analyzed using the SPSS for Windows software, v. 13.0. A p-value of <0.05 was deemed statistically significant. Significant differences were found in heat generation between the conventional group (41.07°C) and the surgical guide group (42.97°C) (p < 0.05). Significant changes in temperature were recorded after drilling, regardless of the method used (p < 0.05). Moreover, the length of the drill was associated with temperature changes, with longer drills generating more heat (p < 0.05). Within the limitations of this study, the use of a surgical guide resulted in higher temperatures as compared to the conventional method of implant placement. However, the highest recorded temperature was far below the threshold for bone necrosis.
Highlights
Dental implants have become an essential part of routine dental treatment to replace lost teeth
Heat generation is considered a decisive factor in the occurrence of bone necrosis during implant placement, which can happen when the temperature exceeds a threshold of 47°C for 1 min
Within the limitations of this study, the use of a surgical guide resulted in higher temperatures as compared to the conventional method of implant placement
Summary
Dental implants have become an essential part of routine dental treatment to replace lost teeth. Flapless dental implant placement has gained popularity as an alternative to the conventional dental implant placement procedure with many advantages, such as being less invasive, possibly causing less postsurgical discomfort, shortening the duration of the surgical procedure, and minimizing changes that occur in the alveolar crest. This might be attributed to a relatively small surgical incision and not raising a mucoperiosteal flap.[3–5]. Whether it increases the risk of bone necrosis is still debatable
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
