Comparative analysis of primary stability of dental implants with different design in low density bone model

Vol. 11 – Number 43 – 2020 IMPLANTOLOGY NOTEBOOK Original article Page 56-62 Comparative analysis of primary stability of dental implants with different design in low density bone model Rodrigo Chenu Migliolo¹ José Ricardo de Albergaria-Barbosa¹ Rafael Ortega Lopes² Douglas Rangel Goulart³ ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the primary stability, through the insertion torque, of three implant types with different macrogeometries using a low-density synthetic bone model. Thirty implants of the trademark Neodent® (Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil), Grand Morse® system, were used, being of three different macrogeometries (Helix®, Drive® and Titamax®). All implants had similar diameter (3.5mm), length (13mm), and surface treatment (Neoporos®). The implants were inserted into a polyurethane block (Nacional Ossos®, Jaú, São Paulo, Brazil) of density 15 PCF or 0.24 g/cm3, compatible with bone type 3. The perforations and insertion were performed with IChiropro® surgical motor, coupled to an Ipad Air (Apple®) with its own engine software (iChiropro IOS App – Bien Air), and a speed reduction counter-angle 20:1 (Nsk® model SG20), following the manufacturer guidelines. Measurement of insertion torque was performed with the IChiropro® surgical motor and Neodent® manual torquemeter. The values obtained by the Drive® and Helix® implants were statistically superior to the Titamax® implant. There was no statistical difference between Helix® and Drive® implants. The different design of the dental implants is a factor that interferes with primary stability. Tapered implants Drive® and Helix® present higher primary stability when compared to the cylindrical implant Titamax®. Differences in thread geometry and cutting chambers between the Drive® and Helix® implants do not influence the primary stability. Descriptors: Dental implants, torque, osseointegration. ¹ Buccomaxillofacial Surgery and Traumatology – FOP-UNICAMP. ² Implantology – Faculdade São Leopoldo Mandic – Campinas / SP. ³ Buccomaxillofacial Surgery and Traumatology – Centro Universitário Euroamericano, Brasília / DF.