Are insertion torque and early osseointegration proportional? A histologic evaluation

Campos, Felipe Eduardo Baires; Jimbo, Ryo; Bonfante, Estevam A.; Zanetta‐Barbosa, Darceny; Oliveira, Maiolino Thomaz Fonseca; Coelho, Paulo G.

doi:10.1111/clr.12448

Cited by 20 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A total of 591 implants were evaluated qualitatively: 348 installed with high insertion torque (. 25 Conclusion: The current review indicated that there is no significant difference in marginal bone resorption and implant failure rate between implants inserted with high or low insertion torque values. (Implant insertion torque, implant stability) to control implant healing and perform possible alterations in the treatment plan as a delayed load or progressive load protocols.…”

mentioning

confidence: 74%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Effects of High Insertion Torque Versus Low Insertion Torque on Marginal Bone Resorption and Implant Failure Rates

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 74%

“…Statistically higher early osseointegration rate (%BIC) at 2 weeks after implant insertion (in dog) was demonstrated by Campos et al 25 in implants inserted in undersized bone sites (median torque value of 70 N/cm) compared with implants inserted in oversized bone sites with lower torque insertion values (median value of 15 N/cm).…”

Section: Berardini Et Almentioning

confidence: 85%

The Effects of High Insertion Torque Versus Low Insertion Torque on Marginal Bone Resorption and Implant Failure Rates

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In partial agreement, Campos et al . found that although the BIC was not affected, adequate drilling to achieve passive implantation outperformed over‐/under‐drilling by means of the bone area fraction occupied . Hence, clinical outcomes echo the uncertain impact high IT might have on peri‐implant bone loss compared with low IT.…”

Section: Excess Of Implant Torque On Bone Healingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…70 In partial agreement, Campos et al found that although the BIC was not affected, adequate drilling to achieve passive implantation outperformed over-/under-drilling by means of the bone area fraction occupied. 71 Hence, clinical outcomes echo the uncertain impact high IT might have on peri-implant bone loss compared with low IT. Future research are currently investigating alternative strategies including the application of osseodensification protocols, 72 lasers, 73,74 or ultrasound tools [75][76][77][78] to enhance osseointegration.…”

Section: Implant Outcomes Under High and Low Implant Torquementioning

confidence: 99%

Basis of bone metabolism around dental implants during osseointegration and peri‐implant bone loss

Ínsua

Monje

Wang

et al. 2017

J Biomedical Materials Res

189

188

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the growing number of publications in the field of implant dentistry, there are limited studies to date investigating the biology and metabolism of bone healing around dental implants and their implications in peri-implant marginal bone loss. The aim of this review article is to provide a thorough understanding of the biological events taking place during osseointegration and the subsequent early and late phases of bone remodeling around dental implants. An update on the coupling mechanism occurring during bone resorption-bone remodeling is provided, focused on the relevance of the osteocytes, bone lining cells and immune cells during bone maintenance. An electronic and manual literature search was conducted by three independent reviewers in several databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register databases for articles up to September 2016 with no language restriction. Local bone metabolism is subject to signals from systemic calcium-phosphate homeostasis and bone remodeling. Three areas of interest were reviewed due to recent reported compromises in bone healing including the putative effects of (1) cholesterol, (2) hyperlipidemia, and (3) low vitamin D intake. Moreover, the prominent influence of osteocytes and immune cells is discussed as being key regulators during dental implant osseointegration and maintenance. These cells are of crucial importance in the presence of biofilm accumulation and their associated byproducts that leads to hard and soft tissue breakdown; the so called peri-implantitis. Factors that could negatively impact osteoclastogenesis or osteal macrophage activation should be monitored in future research including implant placement/torque protocols, bone characteristics, as well as meticulous maintenance programs to favor osseointegration and future long-term stability and success of dental implants. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 105A: 2075-2089, 2017.

show abstract

“…Alternative methods to better retain immobility after surgical placement of conventionally designed dental implants have been suggested (Martinez et al., ), including under‐preparation in diameter of an osteotomy, or the placement of a tapered implant into a cylindrical osteotomy, thereby compressing the cortical bone coronally (O'Sullivan et al., ). Several in vitro studies show that the relative gain of under‐preparation in terms of increased insertion torque or RFA values can be increased by 50%–100%, dependent on the discrepancy between the osteotomy and implant body diameters (Campos et al., ). In contrast, the comparative studies in Table describe the differences between the tapered versus non‐tapered designs up to maximum 10% at baseline in terms of implant insertion torque (O'Sullivan, Sennerby & Meredith, ; Kielbassa Kielbasa , Park et al., ; Torroella‐Saura et al., ; Stanford et al., ) or RFA values (Friberg et al., ; Kim, Lee, Lee & Yi, ; Markovic et al., ; McCullough & Klokkevold, ; O'Sullivan, Sennerby, Jagger & Meredith, ; Östman, Hellman & Sennerby, ; Park et al., ; Simmons et al., ; Waechter et al., ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review of clinical and patient‐reported outcomes following oral rehabilitation on dental implants with a tapered compared to a non‐tapered implant design

Jokstad

Ganeles

2018

Clinical Oral Implants Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Dental implants are available in different shapes. Aims This systematic review aims to address whether tapered compared to non‐tapered implants demonstrate similar clinical and patient‐reported outcomes. The review follows the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses (PRISMA) format. Materials & Methods We searched electronic databases including MEDLINE through PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized clinical trials (RCT) that compare tapered versus non‐tapered implants with at least 10 treated participants and a minimum mean follow‐up time of 3 years. There were no restrictions to a particular treatment indication or outcome measures. Two authors independently conducted screening, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction of eligible trials in duplicate. We applied the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool to consider risk of bias. Results We identified 18 different RCTs, of which three reported outcomes at 3 years or greater. The three trials described the results of 245 participants with 388 implants at 3 years, from the initially 306 participants with 494 implants at baseline. The three trials compared, respectively, two, two, and three different commercially available implant brands and reported only clinically insignificant differences. We judged all three trials to be at moderate risk of bias. The low number and heterogeneity of RCTs did not allow for meta‐analyses. Discussion and conclusion Appropriate professional judgment in clinical decision making must include a comprehensive diagnosis of the patient's jawbone quality and quantity and consideration of osteotomy protocol in accordance with the patient's treatment preferences, where the shape of the dental implant is only one contributory factor.

show abstract

Are insertion torque and early osseointegration proportional? A histologic evaluation

Abstract: Reduced drilling dimensions resulted in increased insertion torque (primary stability). While BIC and BAFO were maximized when drilling the recommended diameter hole, only the oversized hole resulted in evidence of statistically reduced integration.

Cited by 20 publications

References 17 publications

The Effects of High Insertion Torque Versus Low Insertion Torque on Marginal Bone Resorption and Implant Failure Rates

The Effects of High Insertion Torque Versus Low Insertion Torque on Marginal Bone Resorption and Implant Failure Rates

Basis of bone metabolism around dental implants during osseointegration and peri‐implant bone loss

Systematic review of clinical and patient‐reported outcomes following oral rehabilitation on dental implants with a tapered compared to a non‐tapered implant design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About