Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014 Feb;16(1):89-95. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2012.00464.x. Epub 2012 Jun 12.

In vitro assessment of primary stability of Straumann® implant designs.

Author information

  • 1Professor of Clinical Dentistry, Divisions of Periodontology and General Dentistry, Eastman Institute for Oral Health, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA Professor, Department of Oral Surgery and Implant Dentistry, Dental School (Carolinum), University of Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany Clinical instructor, Divisions of Periodontology and General Dentistry, Eastman Institute for Oral Health, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA Resident, Advanced Education in General Dentistry (AEGD), Division of General Dentistry, Eastman Institute for Oral Health, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA Professor and program director of AEGD, Division of General Dentistry, Eastman Institute for Oral Health, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Primary implant stability (PS) is one of the main factors influencing implant survival rate. Several methods to determine the PS have been used, such as Periotest values (PVs) and resonance frequency analysis (RFA) with implant stability quotient (ISQ) values.

PURPOSE:

The aim of this study was to compare different implant designs in regard to PS assessed by Periotest and RFA in vitro.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

A total of 90 implants were placed in freshly slaughtered cow ribs. The implants (Straumann®, Institute Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland; length 10 mm, ø3.3 mm) had the following three designs: Bone Level (BL, 30 implants), Standard Plus (SP, 30 implants), and Tapered Effect (TE, 30 implants). Before implant placement, the investigator was calibrated for every design according to the manufacturer's instructions. An independent observer, blinded to the study, assessed the accuracy of placement. RFA based on the Osstell device and PVs were performed after abutment connection. One-way analysis of variance and Tukey's post hoc test were used for statistical evaluation.

RESULTS:

All implants were mechanically stable. The mean PV for BL was -4.67(± 1.18), for SP, -6.07(± 0.94), and for TE, -6.57(± 0.57). The mean ISQ values were 75.02(± 3.65), 75.98(± 3.00), and 79.83(± 1.85), respectively. The one-way ANOVA showed significant difference among three implant designs in PV (p < .0001) and for the ISQ between BL/TE or SP/TE implants (p < .0001). In addition, the Tukey's (pair-wise comparison) test showed significant differences in PV and RFA between the BL/T (p < .0001).

CONCLUSION:

Within the limitations of this study, higher implant stability was found for tapered designed implants.

© 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

KEYWORDS:

Osstell; Periotest; implant design; primary stability

PMID:
22691157
[PubMed - in process]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Icon for Blackwell Publishing
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk