Bone tissue microarchitectural characteristics at dental implant sites part 2 : correlation with bone classification and primary stability

DSpace Repository

Bone tissue microarchitectural characteristics at dental implant sites part 2 : correlation with bone classification and primary stability

Show full item record

Files for download

Find Full text There are no files associated with this item.

Facebook

Simple item record

Publication Article, peer reviewed scientific
Title Bone tissue microarchitectural characteristics at dental implant sites part 2 : correlation with bone classification and primary stability
Author(s) Ribeiro-Rotta, Rejane Faria ; de Oliveira, Rubelisa Cândido Gomes ; Dias, Danilo Rocha ; Lindh, Christina ; Leles, Cláudio Rodrigues
Date 2012
English abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate in vivo the correlation between the bone microarchitecture of implant bone sites, bone tissue classification subjectively assessed in radiographs and primary implant stability. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Periapical and panoramic radiographs were obtained from 32 partially edentulous patients. Three surgeons classified bone quality at implant sites using two different methods: assessments in periapical and panoramic radiographs (PP) and according to the classification proposed by Lekholm and Zarb (L&Z). During the implant insertion, bone biopsies were taken, and three-dimensional parameters were measured by microcomputed tomography (microCT). Insertion torque value (ITV) and initial implant stability quotient (ISQ) were recorded at the moment of the implantation. ISQ was also recorded at the uncovering stage of a traditional implant protocol. RESULTS: Bone types 2 and 3 were the most prevalent classifications according to PP (54.3%) and L&Z (58.7%). The mean and standard deviation values of primary stability variables were 38.7(16.7) for ITV, 75.3 (7.7) for initial ISQ and 79.3 (6.8) for uncovering ISQ. Several microCT original and factor variables were found to correlate with bone tissue classifications and primary stability variables. L&Z correlated with architecture (r = 0.31; P < 0.05), density (r = -0.43; P < 0.01) and bulk (r = -0.35; P < 0.05), whereas ITV correlated with architecture (r = -0.40; P < 0.01) and density (r = 0.51; P < 0.01). Multiple linear regression analysis revealed that density and bulk explained 32% of the variability of L&Z bone classification, while density and architecture explained 42% of the variability of ITV. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the first step in validating L&Z classification. MicroCT provides objective and detailed quantitative data on bone microarchitecture. Intraosseous implant stability is mainly determined by the density of the bone. ITVs could be a good indicator of primary implant stability, whereas ISQs measurements have some limitations and should not be used alone.
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/clr.12046 (link to publisher's fulltext)
Publisher Wiley
Host/Issue Clinical Oral Implants Research;2
Volume 25
ISSN 1600-0501
Pages e47–e53
Language eng (iso)
Subject(s) bone density
dental implants
microcomputed tomography
Medicine
Research Subject Categories::ODONTOLOGY
Handle http://hdl.handle.net/2043/14853 (link to this page)

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show full item record

Search


Browse

My Account

Statistics