Alveolar Ridge Expansion: Comparison of Osseodensification and Conventional Osteotome Techniques

Jimmy H. Tian, Rodrigo Neiva, Paulo Coelho, Lukasz Witek, Nick M. Tovar, Ivan C. Lo, Luiz F. Gil, Andrea Torroni

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this in vivo study is to compare the osseointegration of endosteal implants placed in atrophic mandibular alveolar ridges with alveolar ridge expansion surgical protocol via an experimental osseodensification drilling versus conventional osteotome technique. METHODS: Twelve endosteal implants, 4 mm × 13 mm, were placed in porcine models in horizontally atrophic mandibular ridges subsequent to prior extraction of premolars. Implants were placed with osseodensification drilling technique as the experimental group (n = 6) and osteotome site preparation as the control group (n = 6). After 4 weeks of healing, samples were retrieved and stained with Stevenel's Blue and Van Gieson's Picro Fuschin for histologic evaluation. Quantitative analysis via bone-to-implant contact (BIC%) and bone area fraction occupancy (BAFO%) were obtained as mean values with corresponding 95% confidence interval. A significant omnibus test, post-hoc comparison of the 2 drilling techniques' mean values was accomplished using a pooled estimate of the standard error with P-value set at 0.05. RESULTS: The mean BIC% value was approximately 62.5% in the osseodensification group, and 31.4% in the regular instrumentation group. Statistical analysis showed a significant effect of the drilling technique (P = 0.018). There was no statistical difference in BAFO as a function of drilling technique (P = 0.198). CONCLUSION: The combined osseodensification drilling-alveolar ridge expansion technique showed increased evidence of osseointegration and implant primary stability from a histologic and biomechanical standpoint, respectively. Future studies will focus on expanding the sample size as well as the timeline of the study to allow investigation of long-term prognosis of this novel technique.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)607-610
Number of pages4
JournalThe Journal of craniofacial surgery
Volume30
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2019

Fingerprint

Alveolar Process
Osseointegration
Bone and Bones
Bicuspid
Sample Size
Swine
Confidence Intervals
Control Groups

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Alveolar Ridge Expansion : Comparison of Osseodensification and Conventional Osteotome Techniques. / Tian, Jimmy H.; Neiva, Rodrigo; Coelho, Paulo; Witek, Lukasz; Tovar, Nick M.; Lo, Ivan C.; Gil, Luiz F.; Torroni, Andrea.

In: The Journal of craniofacial surgery, Vol. 30, No. 2, 01.03.2019, p. 607-610.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Tian, Jimmy H. ; Neiva, Rodrigo ; Coelho, Paulo ; Witek, Lukasz ; Tovar, Nick M. ; Lo, Ivan C. ; Gil, Luiz F. ; Torroni, Andrea. / Alveolar Ridge Expansion : Comparison of Osseodensification and Conventional Osteotome Techniques. In: The Journal of craniofacial surgery. 2019 ; Vol. 30, No. 2. pp. 607-610.
@article{645e7c1b38bc4e3ea50b698b78be9cac,
title = "Alveolar Ridge Expansion: Comparison of Osseodensification and Conventional Osteotome Techniques",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: The aim of this in vivo study is to compare the osseointegration of endosteal implants placed in atrophic mandibular alveolar ridges with alveolar ridge expansion surgical protocol via an experimental osseodensification drilling versus conventional osteotome technique. METHODS: Twelve endosteal implants, 4 mm × 13 mm, were placed in porcine models in horizontally atrophic mandibular ridges subsequent to prior extraction of premolars. Implants were placed with osseodensification drilling technique as the experimental group (n = 6) and osteotome site preparation as the control group (n = 6). After 4 weeks of healing, samples were retrieved and stained with Stevenel's Blue and Van Gieson's Picro Fuschin for histologic evaluation. Quantitative analysis via bone-to-implant contact (BIC{\%}) and bone area fraction occupancy (BAFO{\%}) were obtained as mean values with corresponding 95{\%} confidence interval. A significant omnibus test, post-hoc comparison of the 2 drilling techniques' mean values was accomplished using a pooled estimate of the standard error with P-value set at 0.05. RESULTS: The mean BIC{\%} value was approximately 62.5{\%} in the osseodensification group, and 31.4{\%} in the regular instrumentation group. Statistical analysis showed a significant effect of the drilling technique (P = 0.018). There was no statistical difference in BAFO as a function of drilling technique (P = 0.198). CONCLUSION: The combined osseodensification drilling-alveolar ridge expansion technique showed increased evidence of osseointegration and implant primary stability from a histologic and biomechanical standpoint, respectively. Future studies will focus on expanding the sample size as well as the timeline of the study to allow investigation of long-term prognosis of this novel technique.",
author = "Tian, {Jimmy H.} and Rodrigo Neiva and Paulo Coelho and Lukasz Witek and Tovar, {Nick M.} and Lo, {Ivan C.} and Gil, {Luiz F.} and Andrea Torroni",
year = "2019",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/SCS.0000000000004956",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "30",
pages = "607--610",
journal = "Journal of Craniofacial Surgery",
issn = "1049-2275",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Alveolar Ridge Expansion

T2 - Comparison of Osseodensification and Conventional Osteotome Techniques

AU - Tian, Jimmy H.

AU - Neiva, Rodrigo

AU - Coelho, Paulo

AU - Witek, Lukasz

AU - Tovar, Nick M.

AU - Lo, Ivan C.

AU - Gil, Luiz F.

AU - Torroni, Andrea

PY - 2019/3/1

Y1 - 2019/3/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE: The aim of this in vivo study is to compare the osseointegration of endosteal implants placed in atrophic mandibular alveolar ridges with alveolar ridge expansion surgical protocol via an experimental osseodensification drilling versus conventional osteotome technique. METHODS: Twelve endosteal implants, 4 mm × 13 mm, were placed in porcine models in horizontally atrophic mandibular ridges subsequent to prior extraction of premolars. Implants were placed with osseodensification drilling technique as the experimental group (n = 6) and osteotome site preparation as the control group (n = 6). After 4 weeks of healing, samples were retrieved and stained with Stevenel's Blue and Van Gieson's Picro Fuschin for histologic evaluation. Quantitative analysis via bone-to-implant contact (BIC%) and bone area fraction occupancy (BAFO%) were obtained as mean values with corresponding 95% confidence interval. A significant omnibus test, post-hoc comparison of the 2 drilling techniques' mean values was accomplished using a pooled estimate of the standard error with P-value set at 0.05. RESULTS: The mean BIC% value was approximately 62.5% in the osseodensification group, and 31.4% in the regular instrumentation group. Statistical analysis showed a significant effect of the drilling technique (P = 0.018). There was no statistical difference in BAFO as a function of drilling technique (P = 0.198). CONCLUSION: The combined osseodensification drilling-alveolar ridge expansion technique showed increased evidence of osseointegration and implant primary stability from a histologic and biomechanical standpoint, respectively. Future studies will focus on expanding the sample size as well as the timeline of the study to allow investigation of long-term prognosis of this novel technique.

AB - OBJECTIVE: The aim of this in vivo study is to compare the osseointegration of endosteal implants placed in atrophic mandibular alveolar ridges with alveolar ridge expansion surgical protocol via an experimental osseodensification drilling versus conventional osteotome technique. METHODS: Twelve endosteal implants, 4 mm × 13 mm, were placed in porcine models in horizontally atrophic mandibular ridges subsequent to prior extraction of premolars. Implants were placed with osseodensification drilling technique as the experimental group (n = 6) and osteotome site preparation as the control group (n = 6). After 4 weeks of healing, samples were retrieved and stained with Stevenel's Blue and Van Gieson's Picro Fuschin for histologic evaluation. Quantitative analysis via bone-to-implant contact (BIC%) and bone area fraction occupancy (BAFO%) were obtained as mean values with corresponding 95% confidence interval. A significant omnibus test, post-hoc comparison of the 2 drilling techniques' mean values was accomplished using a pooled estimate of the standard error with P-value set at 0.05. RESULTS: The mean BIC% value was approximately 62.5% in the osseodensification group, and 31.4% in the regular instrumentation group. Statistical analysis showed a significant effect of the drilling technique (P = 0.018). There was no statistical difference in BAFO as a function of drilling technique (P = 0.198). CONCLUSION: The combined osseodensification drilling-alveolar ridge expansion technique showed increased evidence of osseointegration and implant primary stability from a histologic and biomechanical standpoint, respectively. Future studies will focus on expanding the sample size as well as the timeline of the study to allow investigation of long-term prognosis of this novel technique.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067311624&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85067311624&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/SCS.0000000000004956

DO - 10.1097/SCS.0000000000004956

M3 - Article

C2 - 30507887

AN - SCOPUS:85067311624

VL - 30

SP - 607

EP - 610

JO - Journal of Craniofacial Surgery

JF - Journal of Craniofacial Surgery

SN - 1049-2275

IS - 2

ER -