Effect of Primary Stability on Short vs. Conventional -Implants with Reverse Concave Neck.

Daniel Greenberg, Nathan Estrin, Rafael Delgado-Ruiz, Georgios E Romanos
{"title":"Effect of Primary Stability on Short vs. Conventional -Implants with Reverse Concave Neck.","authors":"Daniel Greenberg, Nathan Estrin, Rafael Delgado-Ruiz, Georgios E Romanos","doi":"10.11607/jomi.11263","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Vertical ridge augmentation has less long-term predictability than horizontal ridge augmentation due to common complications with vertical Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR), including early exposure of the barrier membrane and decreased bone stability.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the primary stability of short implants versus conventional implants, in vitro.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two groups of implants with reverse concave neck and neck micro threads (ULT, Ditron Dental, CA) were studied; short implants (Ø 6.0mm x 7mm) and conventional implant (Ø 3.75mm x 10mm). A total of 80 implants were placed by the same calibrated clinician at 800RPM, 40 short implants and 40 conventional implants. Each implant was placed in dense (type II) and soft (type IV) bone. Implant primary stability was recorded using insertion torque (IT), Resonance Frequency Analysis (RFA), and Periotest values. Statistical comparison with Analysis of Variance were completed to compare differences between groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The comparison of IT, RFA and Periotest of the two groups of implants showed statistical significance (P<0.0001) favoring the short implants (Ø 6.0mm x 7mm) in both the soft and dense bone qualities.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Within the limitations of this study, short implants with wide diameter seem to have a higher level of implant stability compared to narrow implants with conventional length.</p>","PeriodicalId":94230,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.11263","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

Vertical ridge augmentation has less long-term predictability than horizontal ridge augmentation due to common complications with vertical Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR), including early exposure of the barrier membrane and decreased bone stability.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the primary stability of short implants versus conventional implants, in vitro.

Methods: Two groups of implants with reverse concave neck and neck micro threads (ULT, Ditron Dental, CA) were studied; short implants (Ø 6.0mm x 7mm) and conventional implant (Ø 3.75mm x 10mm). A total of 80 implants were placed by the same calibrated clinician at 800RPM, 40 short implants and 40 conventional implants. Each implant was placed in dense (type II) and soft (type IV) bone. Implant primary stability was recorded using insertion torque (IT), Resonance Frequency Analysis (RFA), and Periotest values. Statistical comparison with Analysis of Variance were completed to compare differences between groups.

Results: The comparison of IT, RFA and Periotest of the two groups of implants showed statistical significance (P<0.0001) favoring the short implants (Ø 6.0mm x 7mm) in both the soft and dense bone qualities.

Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, short implants with wide diameter seem to have a higher level of implant stability compared to narrow implants with conventional length.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信