The effect of coronal implant design and drilling protocol on bone-to-implant contact: A 3-month study in the minipig calvarium

0Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Stress concentrated at an implant’s neck may affect bone-to-implant contact (BIC). The objective of this study was to evaluate four different implant neck designs using two different drilling protocols on the BIC. Methods: Ninety-six implants were inserted in 12 minipigs calvarium. Implants neck designs evaluated were: type 1–6 coronal flutes (CFs), 8 shallow microthreads (SMs); type 2–6 CFs,4 deep microthreads (DMs); type 3–4 DMs; type 4–2 CFs, 8 SMs. Two groups of forty-eight implants were inserted with a final drill diameter of 2.8 mm (DP1) or 3.2 mm (DP2). Animals were sacrificed after 1 and 3 months, total-BIC (t-BIC) and coronal-BIC (c-BIC) were evaluated by nondecalcified histomorphometry analysis. Results: At 1 month, t-BIC ranged from 85–91% without significant differences between implant types or drilling protocol. Flutes on the coronal aspect impaired the BIC at 3 m. c-BIC of implant types with 6 CFs was similar and significantly lower than that of implant types 3 and 4. c-BIC of implant type 4 with SMs was highest of all implant types after both healing periods. Conclusions: BIC was not affected by the drilling protocol. CFs significantly impaired the-BIC. Multiple SMs were associated with greater c-BIC.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Cohen, O., Bosshardt, D. D., Weinberg, E., Slutzkey, G., & Moses, O. (2021). The effect of coronal implant design and drilling protocol on bone-to-implant contact: A 3-month study in the minipig calvarium. Materials, 14(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14102645

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