Comparative Evaluation of Implant Stability, Insertion Torque, and Implant Macrogeometry in Different Bone Densities Using Resonance Frequency Analysis

5Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Aim and objective: Evaluation and comparison of insertion torque (IT) and the implant stability of two different implant macrogeometry in different bone densities using resonance frequency analysis. Materials and methods: A total of 48 implants (with two implant types having regular and novel macrogeometry) were classified into 4 groups with 12 samples in each group. Group A regular implant without surface treatment, group B regular implant with surface treating, group C novel implant deprived of surface treating, and group D was new dental implant with surface treatment were used. Implant stability quotient (ISQ), implant IT, removal torque (RT) percentage, and torque reduction percentage were calculated. Results: The mean ± SD ISQ value of bone 1 in group A was 56.7 ± 3.2, in group B was 58.6 ± 2.4, in group C was 57.1 ± 3.5, and in group D was 59.3 ± 2.9. In bone 2, the value was 57.8 ± 1.4, 59.5 ± 1.5, 58.2 ± 2.6, and 59.5 ± 2.4 among A, B, C, and D groups correspondingly. In bone 3, it was 59.4 ± 2.4, 60.3 ± 2.3, 60.4 ± 2.8, and 62.7 ± 2.5 among A, B, C, and D groups correspondingly. In bone 4, it was 67.2 ± 3.4, 69.5 ± 2.7, 68.7 ± 2.4, and 69.4 ± 2.3 among A, B, C, and D groups correspondingly. There was a substantial difference in IT and nonsignificant difference in RT in different groups. Conclusion: There was a low IT value with new implant macrogeometry as compared to regular implant macrogeometry. There was absence of association between IT and implant stability.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Haseeb, S. A., Rajendra, K., Manual, L., Kochhar, A. S., Dubey, D., & Dang, G. S. (2021). Comparative Evaluation of Implant Stability, Insertion Torque, and Implant Macrogeometry in Different Bone Densities Using Resonance Frequency Analysis. Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice, 22(6), 665–668. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3118

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free