We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants



Forgotten password?


Dear readers,

our online journals are moving. The new (and old) issues of all journals can be found at
In most cases you can log in there directly with your e-mail address and your current password. Otherwise we ask you to register again. Thank you very much.

Your Quintessence Publishing House
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 35 (2020), No. 1     27. Jan. 2020
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 35 (2020), No. 1  (27.01.2020)

Page 187-195, doi:10.11607/jomi.7481, PubMed:31923301

Bone Healing at Implants Placed in Sites Prepared Either with a Sonic Device or Drills: A Split-Mouth Histomorphometric Randomized Controlled Trial
Sakuma, Shigeru / Piattelli, Adriano / Baldi, Niccolò / Ferri, Mauro / Iezzi, Giovanna / Botticelli, Daniele
Purpose: To evaluate histomorphometrically early healing at implants placed in sites prepared with either a sonic device or conventional drills.
Materials and Methods: Sixteen volunteer patients were recruited. Two titanium mini-implants were placed in the distal segments of the maxilla in recipient sites prepared with either a sonic device or conventional drills. Biopsy specimens containing the mini-implants were retrieved after 2 weeks in eight patients, and after 6 weeks in the other eight patients. Histomorphometric analyses were performed.
Results: Histologic slides were available from seven patients for both 2-week and 6-week periods. After 2 weeks of healing, small amounts of new bone were found in contact with the implant surface, with 5.5% ± 7.3% and 3.8% ± 10.0% at the sonic and drill groups, respectively. After 6 weeks of healing, new bone was 46.9% ± 15.5% at the sonic group, and 46.4% ± 14.9% at the drill group. None of the differences was statistically significant.
Conclusion: The percentage of new bone in contact with the implant surface was similar in the sonic and drill groups.

Keywords: bone density, bone-to-implant contact, dental implants, histology, histometry, sonic device
fulltext (no access granted) Endnote-Export