Sargolzaie Naser, Samizade Sarah, Arab Hamidreza, Ghanbari Habibollah, Khodadadifard Leila, Khajavi Amin
Department of Periodontics, College of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Science, Mashhad, Iran.
Department of Periodontics, College of Dentistry, Sabzevar University of Medical Science, Sabzevar, Iran.
J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019 Feb;45(1):29-33. doi: 10.5125/jkaoms.2019.45.1.29. Epub 2019 Feb 26.
Bone density seems to be an important factor affecting implant stability. The relationship between bone density and primary and secondary stability remains under debate. The aim of this study was to compare primary and secondary stability measured by resonance frequency analysis (RFA) between different bone types and to compare implant stability at different time points during 3 months of follow-up.
Our study included 65 implants (BioHorizons Implant Systems) with 3.8 or 4.6 mm diameter and 9 or 10.5 mm length in 59 patients. Bone quality was assessed by Lekholm-Zarb classification. After implant insertion, stability was measured by an Osstell device using RFA at three follow-up visits (immediately, 1 month, and 3 months after implant insertion). ANOVA test was used to compare primary and secondary stability between different bone types and between the three time points for each density type.
There were 9 patients in type I, 18 patients in type II, 20 patients in type III, and 12 patients in type IV. Three implants failed, 1 in type I and 2 in type IV. Stability values decreased in the first month but increased during the following two months in all bone types. Statistical analysis showed no significant difference between RFA values of different bone types at each follow-up or between stability values of each bone type at different time points.
According to our results, implant stability was not affected by bone density. It is difficult to reach a certain conclusion about the effect of bone density on implant stability as stability is affected by numerous factors.
骨密度似乎是影响种植体稳定性的一个重要因素。骨密度与初期稳定性和二期稳定性之间的关系仍存在争议。本研究的目的是比较不同骨类型之间通过共振频率分析（RFA）测量的初期稳定性和二期稳定性，并比较随访3个月期间不同时间点的种植体稳定性。
我们的研究纳入了59例患者的65枚种植体（BioHorizons种植系统），种植体直径为3.8或4.6mm，长度为9或10.5mm。采用Lekholm-Zarb分类法评估骨质量。种植体植入后，在三次随访（种植体植入后即刻、1个月和3个月）时使用Osstell设备通过RFA测量稳定性。采用方差分析来比较不同骨类型之间以及每种密度类型的三个时间点之间的初期稳定性和二期稳定性。
I型患者9例，II型患者18例，III型患者20例，IV型患者12例。3枚种植体失败，I型1枚，IV型2枚。所有骨类型的稳定性值在第一个月下降，但在随后的两个月中增加。统计分析显示，各随访时不同骨类型的RFA值之间或不同时间点各骨类型的稳定性值之间无显著差异。
根据我们的结果，种植体稳定性不受骨密度影响。由于稳定性受多种因素影响，因此很难就骨密度对种植体稳定性的影响得出确切结论。
