IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i23p8965-d454994.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of Different Undersizing Site Preparations on Implant Stability

Author

Listed:
  • Bernardo Ferreira Lemos

    (Faculty of Health Sciences, Fernando Pessoa University, 4249-004 Porto, Portugal
    Porto Dental Institute, 4150-518 Porto, Portugal)

  • Paula Lopez-Jarana

    (Porto Dental Institute, 4150-518 Porto, Portugal)

  • Carlos Falcao

    (Faculty of Health Sciences, Fernando Pessoa University, 4249-004 Porto, Portugal
    Porto Dental Institute, 4150-518 Porto, Portugal)

  • Blanca Ríos-Carrasco

    (Department of Periodontology, University of Seville, 41009 Seville, Spain)

  • Javier Gil

    (Faculty of Dentistry, Bioengineering Institute of Technology, International University of Catalonia, 08017 Barcelona, Spain)

  • José Vicente Ríos-Santos

    (Department of Periodontology, University of Seville, 41009 Seville, Spain)

  • Mariano Herrero-Climent

    (Porto Dental Institute, 4150-518 Porto, Portugal)

Abstract

As immediate loading protocols are becoming more frequent, the primary stability of implants has become an essential criterion for the osseointegration of dental implants. Based on this, the objective of this study was to understand the influence of different undersized surgical preparation sites on the insertion torque (IT) and implant stability quotient (ISQ). Four different site-preparation protocols were performed on fresh humid type III bovine bone: one control, the standard protocol recommended by the manufacturer (P1), and three variations of undersized techniques (P2, P3 and P4). The implant used was VEGA by Klockner Implant System. The sample size was n = 40 for each of the four groups. A torquemeter was used to measure the IT, and the ISQ was measured with a Penguin RFA. Both variables showed a tendency to increase as the preparation technique was reduced, although not all the values were statistically significant ( p < 0.05) when comparing with the standard preparation. The preparations without a cortical drill, P2 and P4, showed better results than those with a cortical drill. Given the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that reducing the implant preparation can increase both the IT and ISQ. Removing the cortical drill is an effective method for increasing implant stability, although it should be used carefully.

Suggested Citation

  • Bernardo Ferreira Lemos & Paula Lopez-Jarana & Carlos Falcao & Blanca Ríos-Carrasco & Javier Gil & José Vicente Ríos-Santos & Mariano Herrero-Climent, 2020. "Effects of Different Undersizing Site Preparations on Implant Stability," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-12, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:23:p:8965-:d:454994
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/23/8965/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/23/8965/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:23:p:8965-:d:454994. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.