Changes in implant stability using different site preparation techniques: Osseodensification drills versus piezoelectric surgery. A multi‐center prospective randomized controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION Implant stability is influenced by bone density, implant design, and site preparation characteristics. Piezoelectric implant site preparation (PISP) has been demonstrated to improve secondary stability compared with conventional drilling techniques. Osseodensification drills (OD) have been recently introduced to enhance both bone density and implant secondary stability. The objective of the present multi-center prospective randomized controlled trial was to monitor implant stability changes over the first 90 days of healing after implant bed preparation with OD or PISP. METHODS Each patient received two identical, adjacent or contralateral implants in the posterior maxilla. Following randomization, test sites were prepared with OD and control sites with PISP. Resonance frequency analysis was performed immediately after implant placement and after 7, 14, 21, 28, 60, and 90 days. Implants were then restored with single screw-retained metal-ceramic crowns and followed for 12 months after loading. RESULTS Twenty-seven patients (15 males and 12 females; mean age 63.0 ± 11.8 years) were included in final analysis. Each patient received two identical implants in the posterior maxilla (total = 54 implants). After 1 year of loading, 53 implants were satisfactorily in function (one failure in test group 28 days after placement). Mean peak insertion torque (40.7 ± 12.3 Ncm and 39.5 ± 10.2 Ncm in test and control group, respectively) and mean implant stability quotient (ISQ) value at baseline (71.3 ± 6.9 and 69.3 ± 7.6 in test and control group, respectively) showed no significant differences between the two groups. After an initial slight stability decrease, a shift to increasing ISQ values occurred after 14 days in control group and after 21 days in test group, but with no significant differences in ISQ values between the two groups during the first 90 days of healing. CONCLUSION No significant differences in either primary or secondary stability or implant survival rate after 1 year of loading were demonstrated between implants inserted into sites prepared with OD and PISP.

[1]  P. Coelho,et al.  Osseodensification Versus Subtractive Drilling Techniques in Bone Healing and Implant Osseointegration: Ex Vivo Histomorphologic/Histomorphometric Analysis in a Low-Density Bone Ovine Model. , 2021, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[2]  P. Coelho,et al.  Osseodensification effect on implants primary and secondary stability: Multicenter controlled clinical trial , 2021, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[3]  L. Chambrone,et al.  Implant Stability of Osseodensification Drilling Versus Conventional Surgical Technique: A Systematic Review , 2021 .

[4]  J. Helms,et al.  Bone formation around unstable implants is enhanced by a WNT protein therapeutic in a preclinical in vivo model. , 2020, Clinical oral implants research.

[5]  Yaozhong Wang,et al.  The Stability and Survival Rate of Dental Implants After Preparation of the Site by Piezosurgery vs Conventional Drilling: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. , 2020, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[6]  S. Bede,et al.  The effect of osseodensification on implant stability and bone density: A prospective observational study , 2020, Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry.

[7]  C. Kusum,et al.  To compare the stability and crestal bone loss of implants placed using osseodensification and traditional drilling protocol: A clinicoradiographical study , 2020, Journal of Indian Prosthodontic Society.

[8]  T. Vercellotti,et al.  Piezoelectric bone surgery compared with conventional rotary instruments in oral surgery and implantology: Summary and consensus statements of the International Piezoelectric Surgery Academy Consensus Conference 2019. , 2020, International journal of oral implantology.

[9]  A. Jokstad,et al.  Piezoelectric bone surgery for implant site preparation compared with conventional drilling techniques: A systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. , 2020, International journal of oral implantology.

[10]  J. Helms,et al.  Relationship Between Primary/Mechanical and Secondary/Biological Implant Stability. , 2019, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[11]  V. Fabris,et al.  Does the instrument used for the implant site preparation influence the bone-implant interface? A systematic review of clinical and animal studies. , 2019, International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery.

[12]  M. Alkhodary,et al.  The effect of osseodensification and different thread designs on the dental implant primary stability , 2018, F1000Research.

[13]  Y. Sasano,et al.  Experimental Comparison of the Performance of Cutting Bone and Soft Tissue between Piezosurgery and Conventional Rotary Instruments , 2018, Scientific Reports.

[14]  G. Perinetti,et al.  Immediate Loading of Implant-Supported Single Crowns after Conventional and Ultrasonic Implant Site Preparation: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial , 2018, BioMed research international.

[15]  S. Bede,et al.  Does Mixed Conventional/Piezosurgery Implant Site Preparation Affect Implant Stability? , 2018, The Journal of craniofacial surgery.

[16]  M. Farhadian,et al.  Comparing the effect of preparation of the implant sites with piezosurgery and conventional drilling on the stability of implants at 5-months follow-up. , 2018, Journal of long-term effects of medical implants.

[17]  Pierre Lahoud,et al.  Standard Drilling Versus Ultrasonic Implant Site Preparation: A Clinical Study at 4 Weeks After Insertion of Conical Implants , 2017, Implant dentistry.

[18]  J. Helms,et al.  Effects of Condensation on Peri-implant Bone Density and Remodeling , 2017, Journal of dental research.

[19]  G. Turco,et al.  Micromorphometric analysis of bone blocks harvested with eight different ultrasonic and sonic devices for osseous surgery. , 2016, Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery.

[20]  P. Toti,et al.  The Effect of Insertion Torque on the Clinical Outcome of Single Implants: A Randomized Clinical Trial. , 2016, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[21]  P. Tengvall,et al.  Foreign Body Reaction to Biomaterials: On Mechanisms for Buildup and Breakdown of Osseointegration. , 2016, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[22]  Paolo Trisi,et al.  New Osseodensification Implant Site Preparation Method to Increase Bone Density in Low-Density Bone: In Vivo Evaluation in Sheep , 2016, Implant dentistry.

[23]  F. Berton,et al.  Laurell-Gottlow suture modified by Sentineri for tight closure of a wound with a single line of sutures. , 2016, The British journal of oral & maxillofacial surgery.

[24]  M. Peñarrocha-Diago,et al.  Piezoelectric vs. conventional drilling in implant site preparation: pilot controlled randomized clinical trial with crossover design. , 2014, Clinical oral implants research.

[25]  Paolo Trisi,et al.  Insufficient irrigation induces peri-implant bone resorption: an in vivo histologic analysis in sheep. , 2014, Clinical oral implants research.

[26]  T. Vercellotti,et al.  Ultrasonic implant site preparation using piezosurgery: a multicenter case series study analyzing 3,579 implants with a 1- to 3-year follow-up. , 2014, The International journal of periodontics & restorative dentistry.

[27]  G. Romanos,et al.  Role of primary stability for successful osseointegration of dental implants: Factors of influence and evaluation. , 2013, Interventional medicine & applied science.

[28]  T. Vercellotti,et al.  Changes in implant stability using different site preparation techniques: twist drills versus piezosurgery. A single-blinded, randomized, controlled clinical trial. , 2013, Clinical implant dentistry and related research.

[29]  N. Lang,et al.  Factors influencing resonance frequency analysis assessed by Osstell mentor during implant tissue integration: II. Implant surface modifications and implant diameter. , 2010, Clinical oral implants research.

[30]  C. Sim,et al.  Factors influencing resonance frequency analysis assessed by Osstell mentor during implant tissue integration: I. Instrument positioning, bone structure, implant length. , 2010, Clinical oral implants research.

[31]  N P Lang,et al.  Resonance frequency analysis in relation to jawbone characteristics and during early healing of implant installation. , 2007, Clinical oral implants research.

[32]  Pilar Valderrama,et al.  Evaluation of two different resonance frequency devices to detect implant stability: a clinical trial. , 2007, Journal of periodontology.

[33]  Subburaman Mohan,et al.  Microarray analysis of gene expression during the inflammation and endochondral bone formation stages of rat femur fracture repair. , 2006, Bone.

[34]  Thomas D Taylor,et al.  Early wound healing around endosseous implants: a review of the literature. , 2005, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[35]  N. Lang,et al.  Early bone formation adjacent to rough and turned endosseous implant surfaces. An experimental study in the dog. , 2004, Clinical oral implants research.

[36]  T Vercellotti,et al.  Technological characteristics and clinical indications of piezoelectric bone surgery. , 2004, Minerva stomatologica.

[37]  David L Cochran,et al.  Resonance frequency measurement of implant stability in vivo on implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface. , 2003, The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants.

[38]  P Missika,et al.  Optimal implant stabilization in low density bone. , 2001, Clinical oral implants research.

[39]  John B. Brunski,et al.  In Vivo Bone Response to Biomechanical Loading at the Bone/Dental-Implant Interface , 1999, Advances in dental research.