Comparative Evaluation of Implant Stability Using Densah Burs Versus Magnetic Mallet in The Esthetic Zone (Clinical Radiographical Study) | ||||
| Alexandria Dental Journal | ||||
| Articles in Press, Corrected Proof, Available Online from 02 October 2024 PDF (651.76 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/adjalexu.2024.279653.1493 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Abdulrhman Ghoneim  1; Lydia Melek2; Magda Mohamed Saleh3
| ||||
| 1Oral and maxillofacial surgery, Faculty of dentistry, Alexandria university, Alexandria, Egypt | ||||
| 2Associate Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt | ||||
| 3oral and Maxillofacial surgery, Faculty of Dentistry Alexandria University | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Introduction: Recent advancements in dental implantology aim to provide secure osseointegration and good aesthetic results for both functional and aesthetic reasons. A root-form implant is one of the most popular procedures for replacing missing teeth. Stability is the mechanical component that contributes most to clinical success. Objectives: To assess the stability, crestal bone level, and osseointegration of dental implants placed in the aesthetic region via the osseo-densifying approach. Materials and methods: Sixteen patients requiring implants in the esthetic zone of the maxilla received implants using the osseodensification approach by Densah burs in one group and Magnetic Mallet (MM) in the other group with no statistically significant difference in primary and secondary stability between both groups. Results: Primary stability, secondary stability, pain score immediately postoperative and bone density at six months postoperatively were not significantly different between the two studied groups (p=.528, p=.1.106, p=.666, p=.400; respectively); however, bone density significantly increased after six months postoperative compared with the immediate postoperative in the Densah Group and the MM Group (p=.012, p=.012; respectively). The Densah Group has a significantly higher bone crestal level than the MM Group six months postoperative (p=.020). Conclusion: The present study revealed that the MM and the Densah bur facilitate successful implant insertion with satisfactory primary stability in a resorbed ridge in the esthetic zone. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Osseodensification; Densah burs; Magnetic Mallet; anterior maxilla; Implant stability | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 234 PDF Download: 308 |
||||
