» Articles » PMID: 27588215

Primary Implant Stability in a Bone Model Simulating Clinical Situations for the Posterior Maxilla: an in Vitro Study

Overview
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2016 Sep 3
PMID 27588215
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the influence of anatomical conditions on primary stability in the models simulating posterior maxilla.

Methods: Polyurethane blocks were designed to simulate monocortical (M) and bicortical (B) conditions. Each condition had four subgroups measuring 3 mm (M3, B3), 5 mm (M5, B5), 8 mm (M8, B8), and 12 mm (M12, B12) in residual bone height (RBH). After implant placement, the implant stability quotient (ISQ), Periotest value (PTV), insertion torque (IT), and reverse torque (RT) were measured. Two-factor ANOVA (two cortical conditions×four RBHs) and additional analyses for simple main effects were performed.

Results: A significant interaction between cortical condition and RBH was demonstrated for all methods measuring stability with two-factor ANOVA. In the analyses for simple main effects, ISQ and PTV were statistically higher in the bicortical groups than the corresponding monocortical groups, respectively. In the monocortical group, ISQ and PTV showed a statistically significant rise with increasing RBH. Measurements of IT and RT showed a similar tendency, measuring highest in the M3 group, followed by the M8, the M5, and the M12 groups. In the bicortical group, all variables showed a similar tendency, with different degrees of rise and decline. The B8 group showed the highest values, followed by the B12, the B5, and the B3 groups. The highest coefficient was demonstrated between ISQ and PTV.

Conclusions: Primary stability was enhanced by the presence of bicortex and increased RBH, which may be better demonstrated by ISQ and PTV than by IT and RT.

Citing Articles

Influence of implant length and insertion depth on primary stability of short dental implants: An in vitro study of a novel mandibular artificial bone model.

Wu H, Huang H, Fuh L, Tsai M, Hsu J J Dent Sci. 2024; 19(1):139-147.

PMID: 38303865 PMC: 10829676. DOI: 10.1016/j.jds.2023.05.019.


Comparison of implant stability measurements between a resonance frequency analysis device and a modified damping capacity analysis device: an study.

Lee J, Pyo S, Cho H, An J, Lee J, Koo K J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2020; 50(1):56-66.

PMID: 32128274 PMC: 7040444. DOI: 10.5051/jpis.2020.50.1.56.


Bite Reconstruction in the Aesthetic Zone Using One-Piece Bicortical Screw Implants.

Ihde S, Palka L, Janeczek M, Kosior P, Kiryk J, Dobrzynski M Case Rep Dent. 2018; 2018:4671482.

PMID: 29854483 PMC: 5949185. DOI: 10.1155/2018/4671482.

References
1.
Schulte W, Lukas D . Periotest to monitor osseointegration and to check the occlusion in oral implantology. J Oral Implantol. 1993; 19(1):23-32. View

2.
Nkenke E, Hahn M, Weinzierl K, Radespiel-Troger M, Neukam F, Engelke K . Implant stability and histomorphometry: a correlation study in human cadavers using stepped cylinder implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2003; 14(5):601-9. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2003.00937.x. View

3.
Shin S, Shin S, Kye S, Chang S, Hong J, Paeng J . Bone cement grafting increases implant primary stability in circumferential cortical bone defects. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2015; 45(1):30-5. PMC: 4341205. DOI: 10.5051/jpis.2015.45.1.30. View

4.
Aparicio C, Lang N, Rangert B . Validity and clinical significance of biomechanical testing of implant/bone interface. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006; 17 Suppl 2:2-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01365.x. View

5.
Bahat O . Treatment planning and placement of implants in the posterior maxillae: report of 732 consecutive Nobelpharma implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1993; 8(2):151-61. View