[Comparative characteristics of the torque and primary stability values of dental implants with «classical» and «active» threads placed in low-density bone by various techniques].

The aim of the study: Was the analysis of the values of torque and primary stability of dental implants with «classical» and «active» threads, placed in low-density bone with different methods.

Material and methods: Implants were placed into the cancellous bone of pig's breastbone that represents low-density bone. Specimens were divided into 2 groups according to used protocols with 10 samples of each type with «classical» and «active» threads, 40 implants overall. In the first group osteotomy was performed according to the standard technique using the cutting drills, in the second one using osseodensification method. The torque was measured during implantation with physiodispenser and the implant stability quotient with the help of Osstell Beacon device.

Results: Comparative analysis of obtained values showed statistically significant difference with the advantage of using osseodensification protocol in each case. For example, the median torque value of the implants placed by the standard protocol was 15 N/cm and 44 N/cm when using osseodensification method. When comparing implants with «classical» threads, the median value of torque was 15.5 N/cm in the first group and 52.5 N/cm in the second group, and the arithmetic mean of ISQ when using the Smartpeg pin was 69 and 78 units, respectively. A similar result was obtained when comparing implants with «active» threads, in which the arithmetic mean of the torque in the first group was 13.5 N/cm and 35.8 N/cm in the second group, and the stability quotient when using the Smartpeg pin was 67 and 77.1 units, respectively. When using implants with «classical» thread design with an osseodensification protocol hypertorque was obtained.

Conclusion: When working in low-density bone the use of a standard preparation protocol is ineffective, unlike the osseodensification method. The use of the latter with implants with a classic «non-aggressive» macro design should be carried out carefully.