Biological Evaluation of Implant Drill Made from Zirconium Dioxide

Abstract

PurposeZirconia is a good candidate material in the dental field. In this study, we evaluated biological responses against a zirconia drill using a bone cavity healing model.Materials and MethodsZirconia drills, stainless steel drills, and the drilled bone surface were observed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), before and after cavity preparation. For the bone cavity healing model, the upper first and second molars of Wistar rats were extracted. After 4 weeks, cavities were prepared with zirconia drills on the left side. As a control, a stainless steel drill was used on the right side. At 3, 7, and 14 days after surgery, micro‐CT images were taken. Samples were prepared for histological staining.ResultsSEM images revealed that zirconia drills maintained sharpness even after 30 drilling procedures. The bone surface was smoother with the zirconia drill. Micro‐CT images showed faster and earlier bone healing in the zirconia drill cavity. On H‐E staining, at 7 days, the zirconia drill defect had a smaller blank lacunae area. At 14 days, the zirconia drill defect was filled with newly formed bone.ConclusionsThe zirconia drill induces less damage during cavity preparation and is advantageous for bone healing. (197 words)

Infrared Thermographic Evaluation of Temperature Modifications Induced during Implant Site Preparation with Steel vs. Zirconia Implant Drill

“…Moreover, zirconia drills induce less damage during implant bed preparation and advantageous for bone healing [42]. Zirconia drills, when used for implant bed preparation positively influence bone healing compared to stainless steel drills [42]. We found the generation of friction heat during osteotomies for implant preparation to be influenced by the drill material especially when we prepare implant sites in dense cortical bone.…”

“…The use of zirconia material is interesting because it has conductive abilities in the bone tissue, which are almost equivalent to those of titanium implants. Moreover, zirconia drills induce less damage during implant bed preparation and advantageous for bone healing [42]. Zirconia drills, when used for implant bed preparation positively influence bone healing compared to stainless steel drills [42].…”

Steel drills versus zirconia drills on heat generation at the surgical site of dental implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Thus, the difference found in the meta-analysis of this review can be justified by the physical properties of Zr, such as low thermal conductivity, durability, and greater resistance ( Bayerlein et al, 2006 , Scarano et al, 2007 ). In the study by Akiba et al, 2017 after the drilling process, the Zr drills had sharper cutting edges, while the SS drills had greater damage. In addition, Zr drills produced a smoother and flatter bone surface, and were able to induce more effective bone healing than steel drills, suggesting that Zr is a material that presents more favorable conditions for establishing osseointegration.…”

Bone heating and implant removal using a high‐frequency electrosurgical device: An in vivo experimental study

“…Furthermore, a blank lacunae area of 876.2 ± 48.4 µm was observed around the implant 14 days after heating with a minimal power output of HFED used in this study. However, because studies have demonstrated that empty osteocytic lacunae remain after stimulation by implant placement and drilling alone (Akiba et al., 2017; Haga et al., 2009), the surgical procedure may be considered to cause the blank lacunae area around the bone defect as a result of the stimulation by burs in addition to bone removal. Future studies should verify the effectiveness and safety of the thermoremoval method by comparing the results with those of groups who underwent removal by reverse torque or surgical procedure by burs.…”