Resonance frequency analysis: Comparing two clinical instruments

Background Numerous studies indicate implants placed immediately after extraction or with minimally invasive procedures have excellent long‐term success and survival rates. There is general agreement that implants must be stable after implant placement. This study evaluated implant stability changes...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical implant dentistry and related research 2018-06, Vol.20 (3), p.308-312
Hauptverfasser: Becker, William, Hujoel, Philippe, Becker, Burton E.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Numerous studies indicate implants placed immediately after extraction or with minimally invasive procedures have excellent long‐term success and survival rates. There is general agreement that implants must be stable after implant placement. This study evaluated implant stability changes from the time of implant placement to second stage (prior to restoration). Resonance frequency analysis (RFA) was determined for two commercially available units (Osstell, Osstell USA, Columbia, MD and Penguin, Penguin Integration Diagnostics, Sweden). The unit of measurement was the implant stability quotient (ISQ). Materials and Methods Prior to treatment patients were given medical and dental evaluations. Periapical and panogram radiographs were taken Computerized tomography images were taken for sites where adequate bone volume or quality were uncertain. Thirty patients were enrolled in this study (13 females, 17 males, mean age 73.4 years, (maximum age 90, minimum 47 year total of 38 implants were placed. One implant was lost. Computerized implant planning (Nobel Clinician) Nobel Biocar United States (Nobel Biocare, Yorba Linda, CA) was performed for all patients. Implants were placed utilizing a surgical guide. Using Resonance Frequency anal this study compared two RFA systems for determining implant stability (ISQ; Osstell and Penguin). Measurement pegs were screwed into the implants, and RFA measurements were taken at mesial, distal, lingual, and buccal implant surfaces. Stability measurements were taken at implant placement and at second stage. Clinical data and RFA measurements were recorded on data sheets. The average interval between first and second stages was 144.1 days (range 21.3) Results Average interval between implant placement and second stage was 141.1 days. One implant was lost prior to second stage. The results are based on 30 patients with 38 implants. At second stage, the RFA measures were slightly higher than first stage with a mean increase of 1.15, SE = 0.3, P–.067. The Penguin RFA values were marginally higher than Osstell (mean increase 1.10, SE = 0.64, P 
ISSN:1523-0899
1708-8208
DOI:10.1111/cid.12598