Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A Comparative Assessment of Primary Implant Stability Using Osseodensification vs. Conventional Drilling Methods: A Systematic Review.
Althobaiti, Abdulrahman K; Ashour, Abdulrahman W; Halteet, Firas A; Alghamdi, Sulaiman I; AboShetaih, Mohamed M; Al-Hayazi, Ali Mosa; Saaduddin, Ahmed M.
Afiliação
  • Althobaiti AK; Dentistry Program, Batterjee Medical College, Jeddah, SAU.
  • Ashour AW; Dentistry Program, Batterjee Medical College, Jeddah, SAU.
  • Halteet FA; Dentistry Program, Batterjee Medical College, Jeddah, SAU.
  • Alghamdi SI; Dentistry Program, Batterjee Medical College, Jeddah, SAU.
  • AboShetaih MM; Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental Sector, Ministry of Health, Dakahlia Governorate, Mansoura, EGY.
  • Al-Hayazi AM; Dentistry, Suliman Habter Dental Centers, Abha, SAU.
  • Saaduddin AM; Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, EGY.
Cureus ; 15(10): e46841, 2023 Oct.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37954787
ABSTRACT
Osseodensification is a novel biomechanical bone preparation technique that has been established to replace conventional bone drilling and therefore will optimize the implant site. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the implant stability obtained by osseodensification drilling to those associated with conventional drilling techniques. An electronic search was performed in the PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Cochrane Oral Health Group, and Dentistry and Oral Science Source databases searched through Elton B. Stephens Company (EBSCO) for potentially relevant publications in the English language from January 2013 to December 2022. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs), contrasting osseodensification drilling with conventional drilling, studies documenting implant stability quotient (ISQ), and studies reporting the immediate outcome and at least three months of follow-up after dental implant placement were included. Two independent investigators evaluated the quality of the reviewed studies to determine the risk of bias using the version 2 of Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB) tool for RCTs (RoB 2) and RoB for NRSIs (ROBINS-I). Majority of the studies showed that bone density was significantly higher in the osseodensification group. The overall RoB for the NRSIs was reported to be low with respect to confounding, selection, classification, incomplete data, deviance from interventions, outcome evaluation, and selective reporting. The quality assessment of the RCT studies included in the review using the RoB 2 tool showed a high overall risk. The findings of the current review reveal that osseodensification drilling exhibited higher resonance frequency analysis (RFA) and ISQ values than conventional drilling protocols. Similarly, when osseodensification regions were contrasted with traditional drilling, bone density at the implant surface was augmented.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Systematic_reviews Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Systematic_reviews Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article