Histological study of bone quality in the implant sites prepared by the drilling and expansion techniques

Mohammad Jafarian, Fatemeh Mashhadiabbas, Hadi Labbaf ghassemi, Mostafa Alam

Abstract


7

Background and Objectives: Bone drilling and expansion techniques are used for implant site preparation, with inherent advantages and disadvantages. Histological studies comparing these two techniques are limited. This study aimed to histologically assess the bone quality in the implant sites prepared by the bone drilling and expansion techniques.

Materials and Methods: This experimental animal study was conducted on three sheep. Four sites were chosen in the mandible of sheep and implant holes were created by bone drilling and expansion techniques in an alternate fashion. The first sheep underwent vital perfusion immediately after surgery. The second and the third sheep were subjected to vital perfusion 19 and 26 days after surgery, respectively. The collected samples were stained with hematoxylin and eosin and the percentage of osteogenesis, the amount of ossification and sequester area were measured by computer assisted histomorphometric analysis system. The amount of inflammation was estimated for each sample, considering the frequency of inflammatory cells infiltration in terms of degree of inflammation as zero, less than 10% and more than 10% under x400 magnification

Results: The rate of osteogenesis on day 19 was 22.22 % in the drilling and 20.33 % in the expansion group. These values were 28.69 % and 22.52 %, respectively on day 26. The amount of sequesters was 15.05 and 18.77 in the drilling and expansion groups, respectively on day 0. These values were 0 and 3.22, respectively on day 19 and zero for both groups on day 26.

Conclusion: No significant difference was noted between the drilling and expansion techniques for implant site preparation in terms of degree of inflammation or rate of osteogenesis. The amount of sequesters was different between the two groups in the first days after surgery but no significant difference was noted in this regard between the two groups after 3 weeks.


Keywords


Osteotome; Expansion; Drilling; Dental Implant

Full Text:

PDF

3

References


Padmanabhan TV, Gupta RK. Comparison of crestal bone loss and implant stability among the implants placed with conventional procedure and using osteotome technique: a clinical study. Journal of Oral Implantology. 2010;36(6):475-83.

Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Brånemark P-I. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. International journal of oral surgery. 1981;10(6):387-416.

Albrektsson T, Brånemark P-I, Hansson H-A, Lindström J. Osseointegrated titanium implants: requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man. Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica. 1981;52(2):155-70.

Nishioka RS, Souza FA. Bone spreader technique: a preliminary 3-year study. Journal of Oral Implantology. 2009;35(6):289-94.

Davarpanah M, Martinez H, Tecucianu J-F, Hage G, Lazzara R. The modified osteotome technique. International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry. 2001;21(6).

Summers RB. A new concept in maxillary implant surgery: the osteotome technique. Compendium (Newtown, Pa). 1994;15(2):152, 4-6, 8 passim; quiz 62.

Pourdanesh F, Jafarian M, Shariati M, Sharifi D, Khojasteh A. Scanning Electron Microscope Evaluation of Dental Implant Socket Hole: Drilling Versus Osteotome Technique. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery. 2016;27(5):e497-e500.

Nishioka RS, Souza FÁ. Bone spreading and standardized dilation of horizontally resorbed bone: technical considerations. Implant dentistry. 2009;18(2):119-25.

Chanavaz M. Maxillary sinus: anatomy, physiology, surgery, and bone grafting related to implantology--eleven years of surgical experience (1979-1990). The Journal of oral implantology. 1990;16(3):199-209.

Borgner RA, Kirkos LT, Gougaloff R, Cullen MT, Delk PL. Computerized tomography scan interpretation of a bone expansion technique. Journal of Oral Implantology. 1999;25(2):102-8.

Nkenke E, Kloss F, Wiltfang J, Schultze‐Mosgau S, Radespiel‐Tröger M, Loos K, et al. Histomorphometric and fluorescence microscopic analysis of bone remodelling after installation of implants using an osteotome technique. Clinical oral implants research. 2002;13(6):595-602.

Büchter A, Kleinheinz J, Wiesmann HP, Kersken J, Nienkemper M, Weyhrother Hv, et al. Biological and biomechanical evaluation of bone remodelling and implant stability after using an osteotome technique. Clinical Oral Implants Research. 2005;16(1):1-8.

Blanco J, Suárez J, Novio S, Villaverde G, Ramos I, Segade LAG. Histomorphometric assessment in human cadavers of the peri‐implant bone density in maxillary tuberosity following implant placement using osteotome and conventional techniques. Clinical oral implants research. 2008;19(5):505-10.

Marin C, Granato R, Suzuki M, Janal MN, Gil JN, Nemcovsky C, et al. Biomechanical and histomorphometric analysis of etched and non-etched resorbable blasting media processed implant surfaces: an experimental study in dogs. Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials. 2010;3(5):382-91.

Shayesteh YS, Khojasteh A, Siadat H, Monzavi A, Bassir SH, Hossaini M, et al. A comparative study of crestal bone loss and implant stability between osteotome and conventional implant insertion techniques: a randomized controlled clinical trial study. Clinical implant dentistry and related research. 2013;15(3):350-7.

Çehreli MC, Kökat AM, Comert A, Akkocaoğlu M, Tekdemir I, Akça K. Implant stability and bone density: assessment of correlation in fresh cadavers using conventional and osteotome implant sockets. Clinical Oral Implants Research. 2009;20(10):1163-9.

Shalabi MM, Manders P, Mulder J, Jansen JA, Creugers NH. A meta-analysis of clinical studies to estimate the 4.5-year survival rate of implants placed with the osteotome technique. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. 2007;22(1).




DOI: https://doi.org/10.22037/rrr.v3i1.25172

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


ISSN:2476-5163 (Print); 2476-5171 (Online)

 
Creative Commons LicenseThe Journal of "Regeneration, Reconstruction, & Restoration" is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.