Home > Journals > Minerva Stomatologica > Past Issues > Minerva Stomatologica 2019 December;68(6) > Minerva Stomatologica 2019 December;68(6):291-6

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE   

Minerva Stomatologica 2019 December;68(6):291-6

DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4970.19.04242-0

Copyright © 2019 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Primary stability of self-tapping dual etched implants

Zethy H. KASSIM 1, Nor D. NOR HISHAM 2, Nur A. DARDIRI 2, Khor GOOT HEAH 3, Izyan HAZWANI BAHARUDDIN 3, Nicola DE ANGELIS 1, 4

1 Center of Studies for Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, MARA Technology University, Jalan Hospital, Sungai Buloh, Malaysia; 2 Ministry of Health of Malaysia, Putrajaya, Malaysia; 3 Center of Studies for Preclinical Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, MARA Technology University, Jalan Hospital, Sungai Buloh, Malaysia; 4 Department of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics (DISC), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy



BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were to enumerate the primary implant stability quotient (ISQ) value of self-tapping dual etched implants and to explore the influence of parameters such as implant length, implant diameter, age, gender, implant location and osteotomy preparation on the ISQ value.
METHODS: Retrospective data from clinical worksheets given to participants during two implant courses held between the periods of 2013 to 2014 were evaluated. A total of 61 implants were considered based on the inclusion criteria. The effects of parameters such as implant diameter, implant length, age, gender, implant location and osteotomy protocol on ISQ values were analyzed.
RESULTS: Mean ISQ value for all implants was 67.21±9.13. Age of patients (P=0.016) and location of implants (P=0.041) had a significant linear relationship with the ISQ values. Within the age limit of the patients in this study, it was found that an increase in one year of patient’s age results in 0.20 decrease in ISQ value (95% CI: -0.36, -0.04). However, placing an implant in the posterior maxilla may negatively affect the ISQ with a likely decrease in primary stability by 6.76 ISQ value (95% CI: -13.22, -0.30).
CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the mean ISQ achieved by the participants were comparable with the range reported for this particular type of implants. The patient’s age and location of implants were elucidated as the determinant factors of primary implant stability.


KEY WORDS: Dental implants; Osseointegration; Osteotomy; Validation studies

top of page