Analysis of the influence of implant shape on primary stability using the correlation of multiple methods
- 673 Downloads
The purpose of this study was to analyze the influence of the shape of various implants and the density of substrate on primary stability using a combination of methods.
Materials and methods
Fifty-four Neodent® brand cylindrical and conical implants with different prosthetic platforms were used. Implants were inserted into a pork rib bone and polyurethane blocks. Primary stability was assessed by insertion torque (IT), resonance frequency analysis (RFA), and pullout strength. Screws were also analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) before insertion and after removal to justify their use for inserting in different substrates.
The conical cone morse implant had the highest average for all of the assays performed and was significantly different (p < 0.05) from the cylindrical implants for IT in the bone, pullout strength in the 40 per cubic foot (PCF) polyurethane, and the bone. The internal hex cylindrical implant had the lowest averages, which were significantly different (p < 0.05) from the conical implants for IT and RFA in the bone, pullout strength in the 40 PCF polyurethane, and the bone. The IT, RFA, and pullout strength assays were moderately correlated, and the photomicrographs did not reveal changes in the implants.
The analysis of different implants showed a better primary stability of tapered implants; the density of the substrate influences the primary stability and the 15 PCF polyurethane was not adequate to evaluate primary stability; correlation was obtained between the different methodologies of analysis of primary stability.
The study shows the influence of different implant macro-geometries and densities of substrates on primary stability.
KeywordsDental implants Osseointegration Bone substitutes Torque Scanning electron microscopy
We thank the foundation for supporting the research in the state of São Paulo (FAPESP—process number 2012/09208-0) and for funding the study.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict/s of interest related to the present study.
- 8.Bayarchimeg D, Namgoong H, Kim BK, Kim MD, Kim S, Kim TI, Seol YJ, Lee YM, Ku Y, Rhyu IC, Lee EH, Koo KT (2013) Evaluation of the correlation between insertion torque and primary stability of dental implants using a block bone test. J Periodontal Implant Sci 43:30–36PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 14.Jarmar T, Palmquist A, Brånemark R, Hermansson L, Engqvist H, Thomsen P (2008) Characterization of the surface properties of commercially available dental implants using scanning electron microscopy, focused ion beam, and high-resolution transmission electron microscopy. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 10:11–22CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Lekholm U, Zarb GA (1985) Patient selection and preparation. In: Branemark PI, Zarb G, Albrektsson T (eds). Tissue-integrated prostheses: osseointegration in clinical Dentistry. Quintessence, pp 199–209.Google Scholar
- 23.Da Cunha H, Francischone CE, Filho HN, de Oliveira RC (2004) A comparison between cutting torque and resonance frequency in the assessment of primary stability and final torque capacity of standard and TiUnite single-tooth implants under immediate loading. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 19:578–585PubMedGoogle Scholar