Abstract
Background: The primary stability is a determinant clinical condition for the success of different dental implants macro-design in different bone density using a validated and repeatable in vitro technique employing solid rigid polyurethane blocks. Materials and Methods: Five implants 3.8 × 13 mm2 for each macro-design (i.e., IK—tapered; IC—cylindric; and IA—active blade shape) were positioned into 20- and 30- pounds per cubic foot (PCF) polyurethane blocks. Bucco-lingual (BL) and mesial-distal (MD) implant stability quotient score (ISQ) was assessed by resonance frequency analysis while, insertion/removal torques were evaluated by dynamometric ratchet. Results: IC implants shown better primary stability in terms of ISQ compared to IA and IK in lower density block (20 PCF), while IK was superior to IA in higher density (30 PCF). IC shown higher removal torque in 30-PCF compared to IA and IC. Conclusions: The study effectiveness on polyurethane artificial bone with isotropic symmetry structure showed that the implants macro-design might represent a key factor on primary stability, in particular on low-density alveolar bone. Clinicians should consider patients features and implant geometry during low-density jaws rehabilitation. Further investigations are needed to generalize these findings.
Highlights
Mesial-distal (MD) implant stability quotient score (ISQ) was assessed by resonance frequency analysis while, insertion/removal torques were evaluated by dynamometric ratchet
Implants shown better primary stability in terms of ISQ compared to IA and IK in lower density block (20 per cubic foot (PCF)), while IK was superior to IA in higher density (30 PCF)
4A) and mesial-distal scores were globally for all the(BL, implant designs tested on 20-PCF(MD, blocks, while the same analysis globally similar for all the implant designs tested on blocks, while the same analon 30-PCF blocks showed a significant difference among implants designs (Figure 4A,B)
Summary
Compressive forces directly influence the primary stability and within certain limits increase bone density [7]. Once this limit is exceeded, local ischemia and bone necrosis in the titanium–bone interface occur [8,9,10], whereas the tensile and shear forces are less beneficial. Results: IC implants shown better primary stability in terms of ISQ compared to IA and IK in lower density block (20 PCF), while IK was superior to IA in higher density (30 PCF). Conclusions: The study effectiveness on polyurethane artificial bone with isotropic symmetry structure showed that the implants macro-design might represent a key factor on primary stability, in particular on low-density alveolar bone. Clinicians should consider patients features and implant geometry during low-density jaws rehabilitation
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
