medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-7757 (Electronic)
Órgano de difusión de la Asociación Latinoamericana de Cirugía y Traumatología Bucomaxilofacial (ALACIBU)

2023, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Lat Am J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2023; 3 (2)

Stability of post-extraction implants, with a new hydrophilic surface by resonance frequency analysis. Pilot study

Barreto-Latouche H, Milanés E, Jiménez-Tortolero R, Sierra-Rebolledo A

Language: Spanish
References: 15
Page: 71-75
PDF size: 241.28 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: primary stability (PS) of the implant remains an essential requirement for success in post-extraction implants and depends on the implant macro design and drilling sequence. Improvements in surface treatment, physicochemical and bioactive coatings on the surface of titanium implants could improve the conditions for osseointegration. Currently, resonance frequency analysis (RFA) is a worldwide validated method to quantitatively estimate implant stability. This study evaluated the primary stability of post-exodontic Osstem TS III implants with hydrophilic surface by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and insertion torque. Material and methods: a pilot study was conducted in patients who met the inclusion criteria. Osstem-Hiossen TSIII BA and TSII SA dental implants were randomly inserted at post extraction sites. Insertion torque (IT) and ISQ at implant placement and at 8 weeks were recorded. Results: 10 implants were inserted in 4 patients. No implants failed at 4 weeks after insertion. The average RFA was 75.44 ISQ and the average TI obtained at the time of insertion was 41.11 N.cm. Conclusions: based on the results of the study, it can be accepted that implants with BA and SA surface, placed in post-extraction sites, show optimal primary stability values for their osseointegration.


REFERENCES

  1. Milillo L, Fiandaca C, Giannoulis F, Ottria L, Lucchese A, Silvestre F, Petruzzi M. Immediate vs non-immediate loading post-extractive implants: a comparative study of implant stability quotient (ISQ). Oral Implantol (Rome). 2016; 9 (3): 123-131. Available in: https://doi.org/10.11138/orl/2016.9.3.123

  2. Kormoczi K, Komlós G, Papócsi P, Horváth F, Joób-Fancsaly Á. The early loading of different surface-modified implants: a randomized clinical trial. BMC Oral Health. 2021; 21 (1) :207. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-021-01498-z

  3. Bafijari D, Benedetti A, Stamatoski A, Baftijari F, Susak Z, Veljanovski D. Influence of resonance frequency analysis (RFA) measurements for successful osseointegration of dental implants during the healing period and its impact on implant assessed by osstell mentor device. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2019; 7 (23): 4110-4115. doi: 10.3889/oamjms.2019.716.

  4. Tallarico M, Baldini N, Martinolli M, Xhanari E, Kim YJ, Cervino G, et al. Do the new hydrophilic surface have any influence on early success rate and implant stability during osseointegration period? four-month preliminary results from a split-mouth, randomized controlled trial. Eur J Dent. 2019; 13 (1): 95-101. doi: 10.1055/s-0039-1688737.

  5. Tallarico M, Baldini N, Gatti F, Martinolli M, Xhanari E, Meloni SM, et al. Role of new hydrophilic surfaces on early success rate and implant stability: 1-year post-loading results of a multicenter, split-mouth, randomized controlled trial. Eur J Dent. 2021; 15 (1): 1-7. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1713952.

  6. Hagi TT, Enggist L, Michel D, Ferguson SJ, Liu Y, Hunziker EB. Mechanical insertion properties of calcium-phosphate implant coatings. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010; 21 (11): 1214-1222. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.01916.x.

  7. Smeets R, Stadlinger B, Schwarz F, Beck-Broichsitter B, Jung O, Precht C, et al. Impact of dental implant surface modifications on osseointegration. Biomed Res Int. 2016; 2016: 6285620. doi: 10.1155/2016/6285620.

  8. Kim MJ, Kim IH, Chang NH, Kim YK. Long-term evaluation of the prognosis of super hydrophilic surface treated CA implants: a retrospective clinical study. BMC Oral Health. 2022; 22 (1): 97. doi: 10.1186/s12903-022-02142-0.

  9. Huang, Hairong & wu, Gang & Eb, Hunziker. The clinical significance of implant stability quotient (ISQ) measurements: a literature review. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2020; 10 (4): 629-638. doi: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2020.07.004.

  10. Misch CE, Hoar J, Beck G, Hazen R, Misch CM. A bone quality-based implant system: a preliminary report of stage I & stage II. Implant Dent. 1998; 7 (1): 35-42. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-199804000-00004

  11. Mish CE. Misch. Implantología Contemporánea. 4a ed. Resnik R, editor. Elsevier; 2020.

  12. Almassri HNS, Ma Y, Dan Z, Ting Z, Cheng Y, Wu X. Implant stability and survival rates of a hydrophilic versus a conventional sandblasted, acid-etched implant surface: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Dent Assoc. 2020; 151 (6): 444-453. doi: 10.1016/j.adaj.2020.03.002.

  13. Carmo Filho LCD, Marcello-Machado RM, Castilhos ED, Del Bel Cury AA, Faot F. Can implant surfaces affect implant stability during osseointegration? A randomized clinical trial. Braz Oral Res. 2018; 32: e110. doi: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0110.

  14. Andersson P, Pagliani L, Verrocchi D, Volpe S, Sahlin H, Sennerby L. Factors influencing resonance frequency analysis (RFA) measurements and 5-year survival of neoss dental implants. Int J Dent. 2019; 2019: 3209872. doi: 10.1155/2019/3209872.

  15. Sierra-Rebolledo A, Tariba-Forero D, Rios-Calvo MD, Gay-Escoda C. Effect of undersized drilling on the stability of immediate tapered implants in the anterior maxillary sector. A randomized clinical trial. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2021; 26 (2): e187-e194. doi: 10.4317/medoral.24107.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com