Effect of low speed drilling on osseointegration using simplified drilling procedures

Sarendranath, Alvin; Khan, Rubina; Tovar, Nick; Marin, Charles; Yoo, Doo-Yeol; Redisch, J.; Jimbo, Ryo; Coelho, Paulo G.

doi:10.1016/j.bjoms.2015.03.010

Cited by 21 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the number of investigations concerning surgical instrumentation effects on early fixation and osseointegration is at least one order of magnitude smaller relative to other design parameters (Coelho and Jimbo, 2014). The limited body of literature addressing drilling technique and its effects on osseointegration suggests that implant stability can in fact be hastened by drilling protocol alterations in both maxillofacial and orthopedic settings (Galli et al, 2015a, 2015b; Giro et al, 2011, 2013; Sarendranath et al, 2015; Yeniyol et al, 2013). Specific to spine procedures, reviews in literature have primarily focused on the limited perspective of materials available to surgeons for clinical orthopedic applications (Rao et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Osseodensification for enhancement of spinal surgical hardware fixation

Lopez

Alifarag

Torroni

et al. 2017

Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integration between implant and bone is an essential concept for osseous healing requiring hardware placement. A novel approach to hardware implantation, termed osseodensification, is described here as an effective alternative. 12 sheep averaging 65 kg had fixation devices installed in their C2, C3, and C4 vertebral bodies; each device measured 4 mm diameter×10 mm length. The left-sided vertebral body devices were implanted using regular surgical drilling (R) while the right-sided devices were implanted using osseodensification drilling (OD). The C2 and C4 vertebra provided the t=0 in vivo time point, while the C3 vertebra provided the t=3 and t=6 week time points, in vivo. Structural competence of hardware was measured using biomechanical testing of pullout strength, while the quality and degree of new bone formation and remodeling was assessed via histomorphometry. Pullout strength demonstrated osseodensification drilling to provide superior anchoring when compared to the control group collapsed over time with statistical significance (p < 0.01). On Wilcoxon rank signed test, C2 and C4 specimens demonstrated significance when comparing device pullout (p=0.031) for both, and C3 pullout tests at 3 and 6 weeks collapsed over time had significance as well (p=0.027). Percent bone-to-implant contact (%BIC) analysis as a function of drilling technique demonstrated an OD group with significantly higher values relative to the R group (p < 0.01). Similarly, percent bone-area-fraction-occupancy (BAFO) analysis presented with significantly higher values for the OD group compared to the R group (p=0.024). As a function of time, between 0 and 3 weeks, a decrease in BAFO was observed, a trend that reversed between 3 and 6 weeks, resulting in a BAFO value roughly equivalent to the t=0 percentage, which was attributed to an initial loss of bone fraction due to remodeling, followed by regaining of bone fraction via production of woven bone. Histomorphological data demonstrated autologous bone chips in the OD group with greater frequency relative to the control, which acted as nucleating surfaces promoting new bone formation around the implants, providing superior stability and greater bone density. This alternative approach to a critical component of hardware implantation encourages assessment of current surgical approaches to hardware implantation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Osseodensification for enhancement of spinal surgical hardware fixation

Lopez

Alifarag

Torroni

et al. 2017

Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Group A, the surgical guide was placed on the polyurethane block and through the metal sleeve; a pilot drill of 2 mm diameter was inserted to drill the pilot hole. Then, a number of drills (2.3 mm, 3 mm, 3.4 mm, 3.8 mm, 4 mm, and 4.2 mm) was used sequentially to increase the diameter of the hole in order to match the diameter of the implant (24). The length of the drills was 16 mm, so a drill stop of 2 mm was added to the drills to match the 12 mm standard implant length.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Strain Developed Around Short Dental Implants Using Two Different Restorative Materials (In Vitrostudy)

Ibrahim

El-Sharkawy

Nassif

et al. 2020

Alexandria Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION: The use of short implants has been introduced as an alternative treatment for posterior regions, however, it leads to serious prosthetic complications. Using CAD/CAM, materials like zirconia and Bio-HPP can be used to fabricate implant supported restorations. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the strains developed around short and standard implant length using two different crown materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Polyurethane blocks (n=20) were used as alternative materials for human cancellous bone. Blocks were divided into two groups, group A received ten standard length implants 12 mm, and group B received ten short implants 7 mm. Each group was equally subdivided into two subgroups, according to crown material (BioHPP and zirconia). Universal testing machine was used to apply a load of 100 N axially and obliquely at 45° on the restorations. Microstrains were measured using strain meter. RESULTS: The difference in microstrain values between BioHPP and zirconia was statistically insignificant for both group A and group B. Comparing between group A and group B having the same restorative materials, it was found that, the difference was statistically significant for zirconia in axial loading only. A significant difference was observed between oblique and axial loads in standard implant length for both BioHPP and zirconia restorations, and for zirconia in short implants as well (p value=0.043), while the difference was insignificant for BioHPP in short implants. CONCLUSIONS: Short implants are comparable treatment modality to standard implant lengths for single tooth restoration. Oblique forces produce more stresses than vertical forces. According to the average of loads, there is no significant difference between BioHPP and zirconia for both short and standard implant length. However, it is advisable not to use zirconia restorations with short implants.

show abstract

“…It is hypothesized that drilling speed (DS) influences osseointegration by influencing biological responses at the bone‐implant interface . One explanation for this is that osseous drilling at 1500 rpm leads to thermal changes that may damage peri‐implant tissues .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[5][6][7][8] It is hypothesized that drilling speed (DS) influences osseointegration by influencing biological responses at the bone-implant interface. 3,9,10 One explanation for this is that osseous drilling at 1500 rpm leads to thermal changes that may damage peri-implant tissues. 11 However, results from a recent histologic study 12 showed that increase in the DS (range: 1000-1500 rpm) does not jeopardize the viability of osteoblasts and osteocytes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro comparison of resonance frequency analysis devices to evaluate implant stability of narrow diameter implants at varying drilling speeds in dense artificial bone blocks

Romanos

Bastardi

Kakar

et al. 2019

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background There are no studies that have assessed the implant stability quotient (ISQ) values of narrow diameter implants placed in artificial dense bone blocks at varying drilling speeds (DSs). Purpose The aim of the present in vitro experiment was to compare the performance of OSSTELL and Penguin devices to evaluate implant stability at DSs of 800 and 2000 rpm. Materials and Methods A total of 360 osteotomies were created in dense artificial bone blocks at DSs of 800 and 2000 rpm. Dental implants from three manufacturers (group‐1: NobelActive implants, Nobel Biocare, Yorba Linda, California; group‐2: Zimmer, Eztetic‐Zimmer implants, Zimmer Biomet Dental, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida; and group‐3: Astra Tech implant system, Dentsply Sirona, York, Pennsylvania) were randomly placed in these osteotomies using an insertion torque of 15 Ncm (60 implants/group). Implant stability in all bone blocks immediately following implant placement was evaluated using the OSSTELL and Penguin devices. ISQ values were presented as means ± SD. Statistical significance was set at P < .05. Results There was no significant difference in the ISQ values obtained from the OSSTELL and Penguin devices for implants in groups 1, 2, and 3. There was no significant difference when ISQ values obtained from the OSSTELL device were compared with the Penguin device for narrow diameter dental implants placed in dense bone blocks with osteotomies performed at 800 and 2000 rpm. ISQ values showed statistically significant higher values for OSSTELL compared to Penguin device. Conclusion The OSSTELL and Penguin devices are reliable for the assessment of implant stability in dense artificial bone. Implant design and site‐DS does not seem to have a significant impact of implant stability in artificial dense bone blocks.

show abstract

Effect of low speed drilling on osseointegration using simplified drilling procedures

Cited by 21 publications

References 21 publications

Osseodensification for enhancement of spinal surgical hardware fixation

Osseodensification for enhancement of spinal surgical hardware fixation

Evaluation of Strain Developed Around Short Dental Implants Using Two Different Restorative Materials (In Vitrostudy)

In vitro comparison of resonance frequency analysis devices to evaluate implant stability of narrow diameter implants at varying drilling speeds in dense artificial bone blocks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About