Comparison of Primary Stability of Sinus Implants and Standart Implants

Year 2022, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 11 - 17, 30.12.2022

Nur Altıparmak , Çetin Şahin , Tolga Kencer

Abstract

Background
The BoneTrust® Sinus implant (BTSI) enables optimal primary stability by its special design with reduced thread section in
cases of reduced vertical bone availability, thus allowing in many cases a one-step operative procedure even if less than 5mm
of the bone level is available in the sinus region. The aim of this in vitro study was to analyze the primary stability of BoneTrust®
Sinus implant in comparison with standart implants.
In the years 2015-2017, partially edentulous patients were consecutively provided with implant-supported fixed restorations
with the use of 11 BoneTrust® Sinus implants of the Medical Instinct® System (Medical Instinct Production GmbH, Bovenden,
Germany) (Group A) and the 11 standard OXY implants of Biomec System (Biomec system Italy) (Group B) at Baskent University,
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.In this study, measurements were conducted with the Resonance Frequency
Analysis method by using Osstell device on 11 BoneTrust® Sinus implants of the Medical Instinct® System (Medical Instinct
Production GmbH, Bovenden, Germany) and 11 standart OXY implants of Biomec System (Biomec system Italy).
Results
Primary and secondary ISQ values implants were compared and there was no statistically significant difference between these
two groups in terms of these parameters.No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of bone loss
after 6 months.
Conclusion
This present study did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference, between the primary and 6th-month ISQ values of
the standard implants group and sinus implants group.
None of the authors have any competing interests in the manuscript.

Keywords

sinus implant, ISQ, primary stabilty, lateral sinus lifting

References

• 1. Morand M, Irinakis T. The challenge of implant therapy in theposterior maxilla: providing a rationale for the use of short implants.J Oral Implantol. 2007;33:257–266
• 2. Roos J, Sennerby L, Lekholm U, et al. Qualitative and Altıparmak N. et al. Eurasia J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2022 Dec;1(1): 11-17 quantitative method for evaluating implant success: a 5-yearretrospective analysis of the brånemark implant. Int J Oral MaxillofacImplants.1997;12:504–514
• 3. Yun-Ho K, Na-Rae C, Yong-Deok K. The factors that influence postoperative stability of the dental implants inposterior edentulous maxilla. Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 2017; 39:2
• 4. Stefan L, Johannes YL, Detlef A, et al. Influence of Implant Geometry on Primary Insertion Stability and Simulated Peri-implant Bone Loss:An In Vitro Study Using Resonance FrequencyAnalysis and Damping Capacity Assessment.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26:347-55.
• 5. Lachmann S, Jager B, Axmann D, Gomez-Roman G, et al. Resonance frequency analysis and dampening capacity assessment. Part 1: an in vitro study on measurement reliability and a method of comparison in the determination of primary implant stability. Clinical Oral Implants Research. 2006;17:75–79.
• 6. Aydin G, Mustafa A, Hakan G, et al. A. In vitro assessment of primary stability of Bone trust® sinus implant design: An in-vitro study. International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry. 2016;36:731-735.
• 7. Misch CE, Perel ML, Wang HL, et al. Implant success, survival, and failure: The International Congress of Oral Implantologists (ICOI) Pisa Consensus Conference. Implant Dent 2008;17:5-15.
• 8. Kutsuyama H, Jensen SS, Chen S, et al. Treatment options for sinus floor elevation. In: ITI treatment guide volume 5: Sinus floor elevation procedures. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co. Ltd 2011:33-57.
• 9. Boyne PJ, James RA. Grafting of the maxillary sinus floor with autogenous marrow and bone. J Oral Surg. 1980; 38:613-616.
• 10. Soydan SS, Cubuk S, Bayrak B et al. Comparative evaluation of simultaneous maxillary sinus floor elevation and implant placement with residual bone heights greater or less than 5 mm. International Journal of Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30:179-83.
• 11. Solar P, Geyerhofer U, Traxler H, et al. Blood supplyto the maxillary sinus relevant to sinus floor elevation procedures. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1999;10:34-44.
• 12. Vercellotti T. Technological characteristics and clinical indications of piezoelectricbone surgery. Minerva Stomatol. 2004;5:207-214
• 13. Meredith N, Book K, Friberg B, et al. Resonance frequency measurements of implant stability in vivo. A crosssectional and longitudinal study of resonance frequency measurements on implants in the edentulous and partially dentate maxilla. Clin Oral Implants. 1997;8:226–233.
• 14. Herrero-Climent M, Albertini M, Rios-Santos JV, et al. Resonance frequency analysis-reliability in third generation instruments: Osstell mentor®. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2012;17:801–806.