Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 32 (2017), No. 6 21. Nov. 2017
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 32 (2017), No. 6 (21.11.2017)
Page 1288-1295, doi:10.11607/jomi.5881, PubMed:29140373
Clinical Considerations of Adapted Drilling Protocol by Bone Quality Perception
Toia, Marco / Stocchero, Michele / Cecchinato, Francesca / Corrà, Enrico / Jimbo, Ryo / Cecchinato, Denis
Purpose: To evaluate insertion torque value (ITV) and marginal bone loss (MBL) of an implant system after a clinically perceived bone quality-adapted drilling.
Materials and Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included patients treated with implants, conventionally loaded, in completely healed sites. Operators customized the osteotomy preparation according to radiographic assessment and their perception of bone quality. Drilling sequence, bone quality, and ITV were recorded at the time of surgery. Radiographs were taken at the time of implant placement and permanent restoration. MBL between implant placement and permanent restoration was calculated. The implant was used as the statistical unit. Demographic and implant characteristics were shown by means of descriptive statistics. Outcome values were compared using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Multiple regression models were used to test the effect of independent variables on ITV and MBL.
Results: One hundred eighty-eight implants placed in 87 patients were included in the analysis. The mean observation period was 144 ± 59 days. The mean ITV was 30.8 ± 15.1 Ncm. ITV differed significantly based on arches (mandible/maxilla) (P = .001), bone quality (P < .001), implant diameter (P = .032), and drilling protocol (P = .019). Median MBL was 0.05 mm (0.00; 0.24). A significant difference was found between the mandible and maxilla (P = .008) and between drilling protocols (P = .011). In particular, significantly higher MBL was found in the undersized drilling protocol. Multiple regression analysis showed that ITV was influenced by bone quality and implant diameter. MBL was influenced by bone quality, implant diameter, ITV, and the interaction between bone quality and ITV. It was estimated that MBL was greater with increased bone density and ITV.
Conclusion: Excessive ITV in dense bone can cause negative marginal bone responses. A presurgical radiographic assessment and the perception of bone quality are necessary to select an optimal drilling protocol and to minimize surgical trauma.
Keywords: dental implant, insertion torque, marginal bone loss, primary stability, surgical protocol