The Effect of Osseodensification Technique on Implant Stability (Clinical Trial)

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Dental implants primary or initial stability originates from the engagement with the cortical bone mechanically, whereas the secondary stability signifies the stability biologically by means of osseointegration through the bone formation and remodeling from the cancellous bone. Osseodensification is an innovative biomechanical technique to prepare the site. It uses Densifying Burs to produce low plastic deformation owing to its non-removal densifying method of site preparation, which preserves the bone enhancing the host site. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the osseodensification (OD) technique used in implant site preparation by using the newly designed burs (Densah burs), and its effect on enhancing implant primary and secondary stability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty dental implants were placed in ten patients; each patient received one implant using the new Osseodensification drilling technique and one implant using the conventional drilling technique in the posterior maxillary ridge. Osstell was used in measuring resonance frequency (ISQ-scale) which is used to determine the amount of implant stability. RESULTS: The results showed a significant improvement in both primary and secondary stability using densah burs. Conclusion: Densah burs produce better bone quality around the implant than conventional drills, and therefore, there is an improvement in the primary and secondary stability.

Primary implant stability based on alternative site preparation techniques: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…It is noted that four studies 18,22,26,28 did not adjust for within‐patient correlation and further information could not be obtained from the corresponding authors. Therefore, since the data for this review was interpreted with mean and SD, the sample size was adjusted according to the methods stated in Chapter 23 of the Cochrane handbook 14 for adjusting for clustering.…”

“…Table 2 depicts the characteristics of all included studies. Of the 17 studies, three studies discussed OD, 16–18 eight evaluated OT, 19–26 five analyzed piezosurgery, 27–31 and four examined UD, 20,21,25,32 Three studies compared two interventions (OT and UD) with the comparison 20,21,25 . Most of the studies, 12, were RCTs 18–20,23–31 and the other five were NRCTs 16,17,21,22,32 .…”

“…Of the 17 studies, three studies discussed OD, [16][17][18] eight evaluated OT, [19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] five analyzed piezosurgery, [27][28][29][30][31] and four examined UD, 20,21,25,32 Three studies compared two interventions (OT and UD) with the comparison. 20,21,25 Most of the studies, 12, were RCTs [18][19][20][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31] and the other five were NRCTs. 16,17,21,22,32 All 17 studies reported primary implant stability measured with ISQ measured immediately after implant insertion.…”

“…Results of the meta-analysis for the difference in primary implant stability between the experimental implant site preparation methods and conventional site preparation methods are shown in Figure 2. According to the meta-analysis, the UD study It is noted that four studies 18,22,26,28 did not adjust for withinpatient correlation and further information could not be obtained from the corresponding authors. Therefore, since the data for this review was interpreted with mean and SD, the sample size was adjusted according to the methods stated in Chapter 23 of the Cochrane handbook 14 for adjusting for clustering.…”

Conventional Versus Osseodensification Drilling in the Narrow Alveolar Ridge: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

“…A total of 30 individuals in need of dental implants participated in this randomized controlled clinical trial. The sample size was calculated using G*power 3.1.9.4 [ 20 ]. Participants were recruited from the outpatient clinic of the Department of Periodontology and Implantology at Sree Balaji Dental College and Hospital in Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.…”