Abstract
Introduction
Primary stability is an important indicator to obtain a successful osseointegration. However, local factors like bone with low density can negatively interfere in obtaining primary stability.
Objective
This study assessed the effect of different drilling systems, speeds, and movement directions on the expansion of perforations and the stability of implants placed in blocks that mimicked type IV bone.
Material and method
Fifty implants were installed in rigid solid polyurethane blocks and equally divided into the following five groups (n = 10): 1) Maximus Driller (on a clockwise direction at 1200rpm); 2) Maximus Driller (on a clockwise direction at 600rpm); 3) Neodent Driller (on a clockwise direction at 800rpm); 4) Neodent Driller (on a counter clockwise direction at 800rpm); 5) Neodent Driller (on a counter clockwise direction at 600rpm). The stability analyses of the implants were performed through insertion and removal torque testing, in addition to resonance frequency analysis. Additionally, the expansion promoted by the drills associated with the perforations was assessed through tomographic analysis.
Result
We found that implants placed after drilling preparation with Maximus drills at 600 rpm had higher values of insertion torque than the group of implants installed in drillings made with Neodent drills. In addition, the maximus drills showed higher expansion values than the Neodent drills.
Conclusion
Maximus drills are more efficient in promoting osseodensification and their use was associated with increased stability of implants installed in blocks that mimicked type IV bone.
Descriptors:
Cone beam tomography; dental implants; resonance frequency analysis
Thumbnail
