Althobaiti Abdulrahman K, Ashour Abdulrahman W, Halteet Firas A, Alghamdi Sulaiman I, AboShetaih Mohamed M, Al-Hayazi Ali Mosa, Saaduddin Ahmed M
Dentistry Program, Batterjee Medical College, Jeddah, SAU.
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental Sector, Ministry of Health, Dakahlia Governorate, Mansoura, EGY.
Cureus. 2023 Oct 11;15(10):e46841. doi: 10.7759/cureus.46841. eCollection 2023 Oct.
Osseodensification is a novel biomechanical bone preparation technique that has been established to replace conventional bone drilling and therefore will optimize the implant site. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the implant stability obtained by osseodensification drilling to those associated with conventional drilling techniques. An electronic search was performed in the PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Cochrane Oral Health Group, and Dentistry and Oral Science Source databases searched through Elton B. Stephens Company (EBSCO) for potentially relevant publications in the English language from January 2013 to December 2022. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs), contrasting osseodensification drilling with conventional drilling, studies documenting implant stability quotient (ISQ), and studies reporting the immediate outcome and at least three months of follow-up after dental implant placement were included. Two independent investigators evaluated the quality of the reviewed studies to determine the risk of bias using the version 2 of Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB) tool for RCTs (RoB 2) and RoB for NRSIs (ROBINS-I). Majority of the studies showed that bone density was significantly higher in the osseodensification group. The overall RoB for the NRSIs was reported to be low with respect to confounding, selection, classification, incomplete data, deviance from interventions, outcome evaluation, and selective reporting. The quality assessment of the RCT studies included in the review using the RoB 2 tool showed a high overall risk. The findings of the current review reveal that osseodensification drilling exhibited higher resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and ISQ values than conventional drilling protocols. Similarly, when osseodensification regions were contrasted with traditional drilling, bone density at the implant surface was augmented.
骨致密化是一种新型的生物力学骨预备技术，已被确立用于取代传统的骨钻孔，从而优化种植位点。本系统评价的目的是比较骨致密化钻孔与传统钻孔技术所获得的种植体稳定性。通过Elton B. Stephens Company（EBSCO）在PubMed、Scopus、EMBASE、Cochrane口腔健康组以及牙科学与口腔科学源数据库中进行电子检索，查找2013年1月至2022年12月期间潜在相关的英文出版物。纳入随机临床试验（RCT）和非随机干预研究（NRSI），对比骨致密化钻孔与传统钻孔，记录种植体稳定性商数（ISQ）的研究，以及报告牙种植体植入后即刻结果和至少三个月随访情况的研究。两名独立研究者使用Cochrane偏倚风险（RoB）工具的第2版对RCT（RoB 2）和NRSI（ROBINS-I）的偏倚风险进行评估，以确定所纳入研究的质量。大多数研究表明，骨致密化组的骨密度显著更高。据报道，NRSI在混杂、选择、分类、数据不完整、干预偏离、结果评估和选择性报告方面的总体偏倚风险较低。使用RoB 2工具对纳入本评价的RCT研究进行质量评估显示总体风险较高。本评价的结果显示，与传统钻孔方案相比，骨致密化钻孔表现出更高的共振频率分析（RFA）和ISQ值。同样，当将骨致密化区域与传统钻孔进行对比时，种植体表面的骨密度增加。
