Osseodensification Versus Conventional Drilling Effect on Implant Stability

Arab American University (Palestine)

Status

Completed

Conditions

Implant Therapy

Treatments

Procedure: osseodensification drilling

Procedure: conventional drilling

Study type

Interventional

Funder types

Other

Identifiers

NCT05824949

Implant stability

Details and patient eligibility

About

A total of 80 implants were placed in the posterior region of the maxilla in 40 patients in a split-mouth design. Bone quality was classified into type I, II, III, IV, or V as assessed preoperatively on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) . Primary implant stability was measured with insertion torque and resonance frequency analysis (ISQ values). Secondary stability was measured by ISQ at abutment installation.

Enrollment

40 patients

Sex

All

Ages

19 to 80 years old

Volunteers

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

(a) Bilateral edentulism in the maxillary posterior region dating back more than 6 months,
(b) sufficient bone height (distance between the bone crest and maxillary sinus >8 mm) and width at the alveolar crest (≥6 mm) that would not necessitate bone augmentation,
(c) at least 2 mm vestibular keratinized mucosa width and 3 mm mucosa thickness,
(d) full-mouth plaque and bleeding scores <20%.

Exclusion criteria

patients with systemic diseases, conditions, or used medications having the potential to impair surgery, bone, and wound healing dynamics (such as diabetes) will be excluded.
patients who are allergic to antibiotics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs
bone height <8mm
ridge and soft tissue deficiencies requiring augmentation procedures and
endodontic or periodontal lesions neighboring the edentulous sites will be also excluded.