Publicação
Factors influencing primary stability of dental implants assessed with resonance frequency analysis: an in vitro study
| Resumo: | Purpose: To evaluate the influence of two different surgical preparation protocols in the primary stability (PS) of implants; To evaluate if the probe’s tip position and sterilization process of the SmartPeg influences the measurement of implant PS, obtained through resonance frequency analysis. Materials and Methods: Twenty implants ImplanteDouble® (Conexão, Rubeaspharma, Porto, Portugal) with 4.0x8.5 mm were placed in cow ribs. In groups A, B, C and D the implant site preparation was made according to the manufacturer recommendations, and implants were placed with a 60 Ncm insertion torque. For groups E, F, G and H the initial preparation was the same of the manufacturer’s protocol groups, but with an additional drill. Implants in those groups were placed with a 40 Ncm insertion torque. Implant PS values were obtained trough Osstell® Mentor (Osstell AB, Gothenburg, Sweden). In groups A, B, E and F six measurements were taken for each implant, using a new SmartPeg. Three of them were obtained positioning the probe parallel to the SmartPeg and other three positioning it perpendicularly. The same protocol was used for implants in groups C, D, G and H. However, in those groups a reused SmartPeg was employed instead of a new one. For each group the sample size were 10 implants. Results: There were statistical significant differences (p < 0.05) between the ISQ values of implants placed in accordance to the manufacturer recommendations and following an altered preparation protocol, with implants in Groups A, B, C and D presenting higher values of PS. No significant differences were observed between ISQ values recorded with different probe positions and using a new or a 1 cycle of sterilization subjected SmartPeg. Conclusions: The surgical preparation protocol influences PS. Different positions of probe’s tip and sterilization of the SmartPeg, do not affect PS measurements. |
|---|---|
| Autores principais: | Rodrigues, Catarina Gonçalves |
| Assunto: | Saúde oral Implantes dentários Teses de mestrado - 2016 |
| Ano: | 2016 |
| País: | Portugal |
| Tipo de documento: | dissertação de mestrado |
| Tipo de acesso: | acesso aberto |
| Instituição associada: | Universidade de Lisboa |
| Idioma: | inglês |
| Origem: | Repositório da Universidade de Lisboa |
| Resumo: | Purpose: To evaluate the influence of two different surgical preparation protocols in the primary stability (PS) of implants; To evaluate if the probe’s tip position and sterilization process of the SmartPeg influences the measurement of implant PS, obtained through resonance frequency analysis. Materials and Methods: Twenty implants ImplanteDouble® (Conexão, Rubeaspharma, Porto, Portugal) with 4.0x8.5 mm were placed in cow ribs. In groups A, B, C and D the implant site preparation was made according to the manufacturer recommendations, and implants were placed with a 60 Ncm insertion torque. For groups E, F, G and H the initial preparation was the same of the manufacturer’s protocol groups, but with an additional drill. Implants in those groups were placed with a 40 Ncm insertion torque. Implant PS values were obtained trough Osstell® Mentor (Osstell AB, Gothenburg, Sweden). In groups A, B, E and F six measurements were taken for each implant, using a new SmartPeg. Three of them were obtained positioning the probe parallel to the SmartPeg and other three positioning it perpendicularly. The same protocol was used for implants in groups C, D, G and H. However, in those groups a reused SmartPeg was employed instead of a new one. For each group the sample size were 10 implants. Results: There were statistical significant differences (p < 0.05) between the ISQ values of implants placed in accordance to the manufacturer recommendations and following an altered preparation protocol, with implants in Groups A, B, C and D presenting higher values of PS. No significant differences were observed between ISQ values recorded with different probe positions and using a new or a 1 cycle of sterilization subjected SmartPeg. Conclusions: The surgical preparation protocol influences PS. Different positions of probe’s tip and sterilization of the SmartPeg, do not affect PS measurements. |
|---|