Journal of Korean Dental Science

Korean Academy of Dental Science (대한치의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparative Biomechanical Study of Self-tapping and Non Self-tapping Tapered Dental Implants in Artificially Simulated Quality 2 Bone

  • Baek, Yeon-Wha (Department of Prosthodontics and Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Duck-Rae (Department of Prosthodontics and Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Park, Ju-Hee (Department of Prosthodontics and Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lim, Young-Jun (Department of Prosthodontics and Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
  • Received : 2011.08.25
  • Accepted : 2011.12.09
  • Published : 2011.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: Modifications of implant design have been related to improving initial stability. The purpose of this study was to investigate their respective effect on initial stability between two tapered implant systems (self-tapping vs. non-self-tapping) in medium density bone using three different analytic methods. Materials and Methods: Self-tapping implant (GS III$^{(R)}$; Osstem Implant Co., Busan, Korea) and non-self-tapping implant (Replace Select$^{(R)}$; Nobel Biocare, G$\H{o}$teborg, Sweden) were investigated. In Solid rigid polyurethane blocks of artificially simulated Quality 2 bone, each of the 5 implants was inserted according to the manufacturer's instructions for medium-bone drilling protocol. Evaluation of initial stability was carried out by recording the maximum insertion torque (IT) and performing the resonance frequency analysis (RFA), and the pull-out test. Results: The IT and RFA values of self-tapping implant were significantly higher than those of non self-tapping implant (P=.009 and P=.047, respectively). In the pull-out values, no significant differences were found in implants between two groups (P=.117). Within each implant system, no statistically significant correlation was found among three different outcome variables. Conclusions: These findings suggest that design characteristics of implant geometry significantly influence the initial stability in medium bone density.

Keywords

References

  1. Friberg B, Jemt T, Lekholm U. Early failures in 4641 consecutively placed Branemark dental implants. A study from stage I surgery to the connection of completed prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1991; 6: 142-6.
  2. Ivanoff CJ, Sennerby L, Lekholm U. Influence of mono-and bicortical anchorage on the integration of titanium implants. A study in the rabbit tibia. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1996; 25: 229-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0901-5027(96)80036-1
  3. Meredith N. Assessment of implant stability as a prognostic determinant. Int J Prosthodont. 1998; 11: 491-501.
  4. Chong L, Khocht A, Suzuki JB, Gaughan J. Effect of implant design on initial stability of tapered implants. J Oral Implantol. 2009; 35: 130-5. https://doi.org/10.1563/1548-1336-35.3.130
  5. Rabel A, Kohler SG, Schmidt-Westhausen AM. Clinical study on the primary stability of two dental implant systems with resonance frequency analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2007; 11: 257-65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-007-0115-2
  6. Kim DR, Kim MJ, Kwon HB, Lee SH, Lim YJ. In vitro study on the initial stability of two tapered dental implant systems in poor bone quality. J Korean Acad Stomato Func Occl. 2009; 25: 389-99.
  7. Kim YS, Lim YJ. Primary stability and self-tapping blades: biomechanical assessment of dental implants in medium-density bone. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011; 22: 1179-84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02089.x
  8. O'Sullivan D, Sennerby L, Meredith N. Measurements comparing the initial stability of five designs of dental implants: a human cadaver study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2000; 2: 85-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00110.x
  9. Atsumi M, Park SH, Wang HL. Methods used to assess implant stability: current status. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2007; 22: 743-54.
  10. Friberg B, Sennerby L, Roos J, Johansson P, Strid CG, Lekholm U. Evaluation of bone density using cutting resistance measurements and microradiography: an in vitro study in pig ribs. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1995; 6: 164-71. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1995.060305.x
  11. Homolka P, Beer A, Birkfellner W, Nowotny R, Gahleitner A, Tschabitscher M, Bergmann H. Bone mineral density measurement with dental quantitative CT prior to dental implant placement in cadaver mandibles: pilot study. Radiol. 2002; 224: 247-52. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2241010948
  12. Branemark P-I, Lekholm U, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T: Tissue-Integrated Prostheses. 1st ed. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co.; 1985: p.202.
  13. Niimi A, Ozeki K, Ueda M, Nakayama B. A comparative study of removal torque of endosseous implants in the fibula, iliac crest and scapula of cadavers: preliminary report. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997; 8: 286-9. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080406.x
  14. Sakoh J, Wahlmann U, Stender E, Nat R, Al-Nawas B, Wagner W. Primary stability of a conical implant and a hybrid, cylindric screw-type implant in vitro. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006; 21: 560-6.
  15. Roze J, Babu S, Saffarzadeh A, Gayet-Delacroix M, Hoormaert A, Layrolle P. Correlating implant stability to bone structure. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009; 20: 1140-5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01745.x
  16. Friberg B, Gröndahl K, Lekholm U. A new self-tapping Branemark implant: clinical and radiographic evaluation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1992; 7: 80-5.
  17. Akca K, Akkocaoglu M, Comert A, Tekdemir I, Cehreli MC. Human ex vivo bone tissue strains around immediately loaded implants supporting maxillary overdentures. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005; 16: 715-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01176.x
  18. Akkocaoglu M, Uysal S, Tekdemir I, Akca K, Cehreli MC. Implant design and intraosseous stability of immediately placed implants: a human cadaver study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005; 16: 202-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01099.x
  19. Ersanli S, Karabuda C, Beck F, Leblebicioglu B. Resonance frequency analysis of one-stage dental implant stability during the osseointegration period. J Periodontol. 2005; 76: 1066-71. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2005.76.7.1066
  20. Meredith N, Book K, Friberg B, Jemt T, Sennerby L. Resonance frequency measurements of implant stability in vivo. A cross-sectional and longitudinal study of resonance frequency measurements on implants in the edentulous and partially dentate maxilla. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1997; 8: 226-33. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080309.x
  21. Calvert KL, Trumble KP, Webster TJ, Kirkpatrick LA. Characterization of commercial rigid polyurethane foams used as bone analogs for implant testing. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2010; 21: 1453-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-010-4024-6
  22. Tabassum A, Meijer GJ, Wolke JGC, Jansen JA. Influence of the surgical technique and surface roughness on the primary stability of an implant in artificial bone with a density equivalent to maxillary bone: a laboratory study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009; 20: 327-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01692.x