Abstract
BackgroundDental implant primary stability is thought to be a fundamental prerequisite for the long-term survival and success. The aim of this study was to analyze the influence of protocol and insertion mode on dental implant stability ex vivo. One hundred and twenty implants were inserted either manually or machine-driven into porcine mandibles by a standard or over-dimensioned protocol. Dental implant stability was measured via resonance frequency analysis (RFA), insertion torque (IT), and torque out (TO).ResultsStatistically significant higher IT and TO values were seen after standard protocol insertion (p < 0.05), whereas manual and machine-driven insertion mode showed equivalent values.ConclusionsThe over-dimensioned protocol exceeded the primary stability values recommended for immediate implant insertion; therefore, it could be recommended as well.
Highlights
Dental implant primary stability is thought to be a fundamental prerequisite for the long-term survival and success
Drilling protocol: standard versus over-dimensioned No statistically significant difference in resonance frequency analysis (RFA) could be measured (Cohen’s d = − 0.022, effect size r = 0.011, p = 0.260), whereas insertion torque (IT) values were significantly higher in implants inserted via Standard protocol (SP) (90.56 ± 31.27 Ncm) in comparison with the over-dimensioned protocols (ODP) (63.74 ± 48.61 Ncm, p = 0.002; Implant geometry: standard protocol No statistically significant difference regarding implant stability quotient (ISQ) (p = 0.353), IT (p = 0.099), or torque out (TO) (p = 0.337) could be measured between implants of different diameter
The aim of this study was to analyze the influence of protocol and insertion mode on dental implant primary stability ex vivo
Summary
Dental implant primary stability is thought to be a fundamental prerequisite for the long-term survival and success. Dental implant stability was measured via resonance frequency analysis (RFA), insertion torque (IT), and torque out (TO). IT is a mechanical parameter influenced by surgical procedure [10, 11], implant design [8, 10, 11], and bone quality [2, 6, 8, 10,11,12] It has been defined by the Foundation for Oral Rehabilitation as the cutting resistance of the bone during implant insertion, the friction, and has been considered an indirect value of implant primary stability [13].
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.
