Sheikh Ibrahim Abdulkarim, Jaafo Mohamad Hassan
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Damascus University, Damascus, SYR.
Cureus. 2024 Sep 27;16(9):e70318. doi: 10.7759/cureus.70318. eCollection 2024 Sep.
Osseointegration is considered a prerequisite for the long-term success of dental implants, and many researchers have considered the stability of the implant when placed in the bone. Many techniques include undersized drilling, densifying burs, magnetic mallets, and expanders. These methods have led to higher initial insertion torque values. The present study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of expanders, densifying burs, and magnetic mallet methods for preparing the implant site in low-density bone and compare them in terms of achieving good initial implant stability.
The present study was conducted in an ex vivo animal model using bovine rib bones. This study was performed on 20 bovine ribs; each rib had four implant site preparations divided into four groups according to the drilling method: a control group of the conventional technique (n=20), the expanders group (n=20), the densification burs group (n=20), and the magnetic mallet group (n=20). The measured values were Primary Insertion Torque and Implant Stability Quotient (ISQ).
The highest average insertion torque was in the magnetic Mallet group, where the average was 43.75 N/cm, followed by the burs group, where the average was 43.00 N/cm, then the expanders group with an average of 32.80 N/cm, then the conventional preparation group with 19.30 N/cm as the lowest average among the study groups. The highest ISQ mean was in the burs group, where the mean was 80.30, followed by the magnetic Mallet group, where the mean was 80.20, then the expanders group with a mean of 68.90, then the conventional preparation group with 50.10 as the lowest mean among the study groups.
Within the limitation of this study, we conclude that all methods used were better than conventional preparation in both ISQ and insertion torque, with the magnetic mallet group outperforming the insertion torque and the Densah burs outperforming the ISQ.
骨结合被认为是牙种植体长期成功的先决条件，许多研究人员考虑了种植体植入骨内时的稳定性。许多技术包括使用尺寸过小的钻头、致密化车针、磁性锤和扩张器。这些方法导致了更高的初始植入扭矩值。本研究旨在评估扩张器、致密化车针和磁性锤方法在低密度骨中制备种植位点的有效性，并在实现良好的初始种植体稳定性方面对它们进行比较。
本研究在使用牛肋骨的体外动物模型中进行。本研究对20根牛肋骨进行；每根肋骨有四个种植位点制备，根据钻孔方法分为四组：传统技术对照组（n = 20）、扩张器组（n = 20）、致密化车针组（n = 20）和磁性锤组（n = 20）。测量值为初始植入扭矩和种植体稳定性商数（ISQ）。
平均植入扭矩最高的是磁性锤组，平均为43.75 N/cm，其次是车针组，平均为43.00 N/cm，然后是扩张器组，平均为32.80 N/cm，最后是传统制备组，平均为19.30 N/cm，是研究组中最低的平均值。ISQ平均值最高的是车针组，平均值为80.30，其次是磁性锤组，平均值为80.20，然后是扩张器组，平均值为68.90，最后是传统制备组，平均值为50.10，是研究组中最低的平均值。
在本研究的局限性内，我们得出结论，所有使用的方法在ISQ和植入扭矩方面均优于传统制备方法，磁性锤组在植入扭矩方面表现优于其他组，而Densah车针在ISQ方面表现更优。
