Efficiency of osseodensification versus screw expansion technique for augmentation of narrow alveolar ridges: A comparative clinical study

Nawfal H Tofan, Ali HA Al-Hussaini, Nazih S Mustafa
{"title":"Efficiency of osseodensification versus screw expansion technique for augmentation of narrow alveolar ridges: A comparative clinical study","authors":"Nawfal H Tofan, Ali HA Al-Hussaini, Nazih S Mustafa","doi":"10.26477/jbcd.v36i1.3589","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Alveolar ridge expansion is proposed when the alveolar crest thickness is ≤5 mm. The screw expansion technique has been utilized for many years to expand narrow alveolar ridges. Recently, the osseodensification technique has been suggested as a reliable technique to expand narrow alveolar ridges with effective width gain and as little surgical operating time as possible. The current study aimed to compare osseodensification and screw expansion in terms of clinical width gain and operating time. Materials and methods: Forty implant osteotomies were performed in deficient horizontal alveolar ridges (3–5 mm). A total of 19 patients aged 21–59 years were randomized into two groups: the screw expansion group, which involved 20 osteotomies performed by screw expander drills, and osseodensification group, which comprised 20 osteotomies achieved by osseodensification drilling technique. One millimetre below the alveolar bone crest was measured with a bone caliper at two intervals (before implant osteotomy and after implant osteotomy), and operating time was assessed. Results: Before expansion, the mean alveolar ridge width was 4.20 ± 0.71 mm in the osseodensification group and 4.52 ± 0.53 mm in the screw-expansion group. No statistically significant difference in alveolar bone width before expansion was found between the groups (P > 0.05). After the expansion of the alveolar ridge with osseodensification or screw expansion techniques, the average ridge width was 5.48 ± 0.57 mm in the osseodensification group and 5.71 ± 0.53 mm in the screw-expansion group. Difference in width gain postoperatively between the groups was 0.09 mm, which was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). According to operating time, osseodensification consumed 6.21 ± 0.55 minutes, and screw expansion required 16.32 ± 0.60 minutes for a single implant with a significant difference between the groups (P < 0.0001). Conclusion: Alveolar bone expansion by osseodensification showed comparable width gain and less surgical operating time compared with expansion by screw expansion technique.","PeriodicalId":15041,"journal":{"name":"Journal of baghdad college of dentistry","volume":"24 35","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of baghdad college of dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26477/jbcd.v36i1.3589","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Alveolar ridge expansion is proposed when the alveolar crest thickness is ≤5 mm. The screw expansion technique has been utilized for many years to expand narrow alveolar ridges. Recently, the osseodensification technique has been suggested as a reliable technique to expand narrow alveolar ridges with effective width gain and as little surgical operating time as possible. The current study aimed to compare osseodensification and screw expansion in terms of clinical width gain and operating time. Materials and methods: Forty implant osteotomies were performed in deficient horizontal alveolar ridges (3–5 mm). A total of 19 patients aged 21–59 years were randomized into two groups: the screw expansion group, which involved 20 osteotomies performed by screw expander drills, and osseodensification group, which comprised 20 osteotomies achieved by osseodensification drilling technique. One millimetre below the alveolar bone crest was measured with a bone caliper at two intervals (before implant osteotomy and after implant osteotomy), and operating time was assessed. Results: Before expansion, the mean alveolar ridge width was 4.20 ± 0.71 mm in the osseodensification group and 4.52 ± 0.53 mm in the screw-expansion group. No statistically significant difference in alveolar bone width before expansion was found between the groups (P > 0.05). After the expansion of the alveolar ridge with osseodensification or screw expansion techniques, the average ridge width was 5.48 ± 0.57 mm in the osseodensification group and 5.71 ± 0.53 mm in the screw-expansion group. Difference in width gain postoperatively between the groups was 0.09 mm, which was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). According to operating time, osseodensification consumed 6.21 ± 0.55 minutes, and screw expansion required 16.32 ± 0.60 minutes for a single implant with a significant difference between the groups (P < 0.0001). Conclusion: Alveolar bone expansion by osseodensification showed comparable width gain and less surgical operating time compared with expansion by screw expansion technique.
骨增量技术与螺钉扩张技术在牙槽嵴狭窄处的增量效果:临床对比研究
背景:当牙槽嵴厚度≤5毫米时,建议进行牙槽嵴扩展。多年来,人们一直使用螺钉扩张技术来扩张狭窄的牙槽脊。最近,骨增量技术被认为是一种可靠的技术,可以有效地增加牙槽嵴的宽度,并尽可能缩短手术时间。本研究旨在比较骨增量技术和螺钉扩张技术在临床宽度增加和手术时间方面的效果。材料和方法在缺损的水平牙槽嵴(3-5 毫米)上进行了 40 例种植体截骨术。19名年龄在21-59岁之间的患者被随机分为两组:螺钉扩张组和骨增量组,前者包括20例通过螺钉扩张钻完成的截骨术,后者包括20例通过骨增量钻技术完成的截骨术。用骨卡尺在两个时间间隔(种植体截骨前和种植体截骨后)测量牙槽骨嵴下一毫米的位置,并评估手术时间。结果扩建前,骨质增生组的平均牙槽嵴宽度为(4.20 ± 0.71)毫米,螺钉扩建组的平均牙槽嵴宽度为(4.52 ± 0.53)毫米。两组在扩建前的牙槽骨宽度差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。使用骨强化或螺钉扩张技术扩张牙槽嵴后,骨强化组的平均牙槽嵴宽度为 5.48 ± 0.57 毫米,螺钉扩张组的平均牙槽嵴宽度为 5.71 ± 0.53 毫米。两组术后宽度增加差异为 0.09 毫米,无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。手术时间方面,骨增量组单次种植耗时(6.21 ± 0.55)分钟,螺钉扩张组单次种植耗时(16.32 ± 0.60)分钟,组间差异显著(P < 0.0001)。结论与螺钉扩张技术相比,骨增量法扩张牙槽骨的宽度增加相当,手术操作时间更短。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书