Evaluation of different drilling protocols effect on bone healing around dental implant using CBCT. | ||||
| Al-Azhar Journal of Dental Science | ||||
| Volume 28, Issue 1, January 2025, Page 107-113 PDF (1005.38 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/ajdsm.2024.325486.1581 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Hisham Mohamed El Sheikh  1; Sara Fikry2
| ||||
| 1Lecturer of Radiology, Faculty of Dentistry ,The British University in Egypt. Cairo ,Egypt | ||||
| 2Associate Professor of Removable Prosthodontics, The British University in Egypt. | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Abstract: Purpose: The objective of the present study is to analyze and compare the effect of different implant drilling protocols on host bone and measure them using CBCT. Materials and Methods: 20 patients with kennedy class III modification 1 edentulous areas were recruited for this study and divided into two groups; Control group received implants with conventional osteotomy preparation following standard drilling protocol (speed= 1200 rpm) with torque of 30 N and sufficient saline irrigation, while Study group received implants with osteotomy preparation following a low speed drilling protocol (speed < 200 rpm) without irrigation and a torque of 50 N. Cone Beam CT was used to evaluate bone height and density around the implants at 3, 6 and 12 months after insertion. Implant primary stability was evaluated using Ostell by Resonance Frequency Analysis. Results No significant difference was showed between bone height changes and densities in the control and study groups. Implants primary stability also showed no significant difference in ISQ values between both groups. Conclusion Biologic drilling is a promising implant drilling protocol with the potential to insert implants showing successful osseointegration and acceptable bone changes. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Dental Implant; CBCT; Bone Healing | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 80 PDF Download: 44 |
||||
