Background : Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study (2)
To avoid invasive sinus augmentation procedures, implants have been designed in shorter lengths such as 8 mm. To further enhance short implant primary stability, a tapered design has been developed which has been proven to provide greater initial stability. Implant stability can be evaluated by different measures such as torque at the time of implant placement, resistance to reverse torque, and resonance frequency analysis (RFA).
Multiple studies have established feasibility for validating implant stability in lab and animal models to justify using resonance frequency analysis in clinical trials. Limited literature exists on the OSPTX implant design, and to our knowledge, no clinical studies exist that compare OSP to OSPTX. A recent ex vivo comparison of two different designs of OSPTX implants in porcine mandibles demonstrated that a conical neck design presented higher primary stability (insertion torque and implant stability quotient (ISQ)) than a cylindrical neck design. In our study, both the torque value and ISQ value were recorded at the time of placement. ISQ values were also recorded at implant uncovery at 6 weeks and also at 6 and 12 months when the final restoration was placed.
A recent systematic review by Stocchero et al. concluded that an undersized drilling protocol in soft bone is an effective way to enhance insertion torque but recommended that further clinical studies are needed to confirm these data. Our study was designed to address this question, as it compared the standard drilling protocol to a soft bone protocol.
Our study hypothesis is that the stability of the OSPTX implant will be greater than that of the OSP implant due to the tapered design of the OSPTX implant.
The objectives of this study were the following:
- To determine whether preparation of the osteotomy with a soft bone protocol (underpreparation of the osteotomy compared to the implant diameter by −0.5 mm at the body portion) results in greater primary implant stability
- To investigate possible correlations between ISQ and torque values
- To evaluate radiographic bone loss at 6 months and 1 year
Serial posts:
- Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study
- Background : Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study (1)
- Background : Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study (2)
- Methods : Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study
- Results : Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study
- Discussion : Comparative evaluation of the stability of two different dental implant designs and surgical protocols—a pilot study
- Figure 1. Implant design
- Table 1 Patient selection criteria
- Figure 2. ISQ values at placement, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year
- Figure 3. Mean bone loss at 6 months and 1 year
- Table 2 Outcome success criteria