Al-Jetaily Samer, Al-Dosari Abdullah Alfarraj
Division of Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Dent J. 2011 Jan;23(1):17-21. doi: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2010.09.003. Epub 2010 Nov 13.
The objectives of this in vitro study were to investigate the sensitivity and reliability of the Osstell™ systems (Resonance Frequency Analysis - RFA) compared to the Periotest® system in implant bone simulated conditions. Three conditions were simulated: (1) the direct fixture-bone contact and fibrous tissue fixture contact, (2) The different levels of horizontal bone loss, and (3) The hardening implant-bone interface.
Forty-nine dental implant fixtures were placed in the center of acrylic cubes. In Part I seven fixtures were placed in direct contact with acrylic and another seven were placed in contact with polyvinyl siloxane impression material as soft interface. Part II: four sets of 0, 2, 4 and 6 mm horizontally exposed fixture samples were made (seven fixtures in each set). Part III: seven fixtures were placed in contact with a thin mix of autopolymerizing resin. The stability of these fixtures was measured using Osstell™ and Periotest® systems.
The mean Periotest® value(PTV) and Osstell™ measurements showed a significant difference between the direct contact and soft interface (P < 0.001). These values also showed statistically significant difference between the different levels of horizontally exposed fixture groups (P < 0.001). The level of horizontal fixture exposure was strongly correlated with the PTVS (r = 0.967) and strongly negatively correlated with Implant Stability Quotient (r = -0.946). A strong correlation was found between the Osstell™ readings and the change in the stiffness of the autopolymerizing resin fixture interface group (r = 0.986).
Both Osstell™ and Periotest® systems proved to be sensitive in measuring dental implant stability in hard and in soft interfaces. Osstell™ also proved to be sensitive in detecting changes in the fixture interface stiffness. Osstell™ system proved to be more reliable compared to Periotest® system in measuring dental implant stability in hard and in soft interfaces.
本体外研究的目的是在种植体骨模拟条件下，研究Osstell™系统（共振频率分析 - RFA）与Periotest®系统相比的敏感性和可靠性。模拟了三种情况：（1）种植体与骨直接接触以及种植体与纤维组织接触；（2）不同程度的水平骨吸收；（3）种植体 - 骨界面硬化。
将49个牙种植体植入丙烯酸树脂块中心。在第一部分中，7个种植体与丙烯酸树脂直接接触放置，另外7个种植体与作为软界面的聚乙烯基硅氧烷印模材料接触放置。第二部分：制作了四组水平暴露长度分别为0、2、4和6毫米的种植体样本（每组7个种植体）。第三部分：7个种植体与自凝树脂的稀薄混合物接触放置。使用Osstell™和Periotest®系统测量这些种植体的稳定性。
平均Periotest®值（PTV）和Osstell™测量结果显示，直接接触组和软界面组之间存在显著差异（P < 0.001）。这些值在不同水平暴露的种植体组之间也显示出统计学上的显著差异（P < 0.001）。种植体水平暴露程度与PTV值呈强正相关（r = 0.967），与种植体稳定性商数呈强负相关（r = -0.946）。在Osstell™读数与自凝树脂种植体界面组的刚度变化之间发现了强相关性（r = 0.986）。
Osstell™和Periotest®系统在测量硬界面和软界面中的牙种植体稳定性方面均具有敏感性。Osstell™在检测种植体界面刚度变化方面也具有敏感性。在测量硬界面和软界面中的牙种植体稳定性时，Osstell™系统比Periotest®系统更可靠。
