Dental İmplant Söküm Torku Değerlerinin Anguldurva ve Torklu Raşet ile Karşılaştırılması

Year 2020, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 1 - 6, 17.12.2020

Levent Ciğerim , Zeynep Dilan Orhan

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, bir mandibula modelinde farklı soketlere yerleştirilmiş dental implantın, anguldurva ve torklu raşet ile söküm torklarının karşılaştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Çalışmada mandibula modeli üzerinde 33, 43, 36, 46 nolu diş bölgelerine 3,7 mm çapında ve 10 mm boyunda bir implant için birbirine eş dört yuva açılmıştır. İmplant 30 rpm hızda ve 30 Newton santimetre (Ncm) tork kuvvetinde anguldurva ile yuvalara yerleştirilmiştir. Toplamda 120 defa yerleştirilip sökülen implantın söküm torkları 1. grupta torklu raşet, 2. grupta ise anguldurva ile ölçülerek incelenmiştir. Her bir bölgeye 30’ar defa yerleştirilen implantın anguldurva ile söküm torku 27,58±7,34 Ncm, torklu raşet ile söküm torku ise 28,67±4,68 Ncm olarak bulunmuştur. Yöntemler arasında söküm torku değerleri bakımından istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark saptanmamıştır (p>0,05). Gerek anguldurva gerekse torklu raşet ile ölçülen implant söküm torku değerlerinin benzer olduğu görülmüştür.

Keywords

Anguldurva, implant, söküm torku, torklu raşet, yerleştirme torku

Comparison of Dental Implant Removal Torque Values with Implant Handpiece and Torque Ratchet

Abstract

In this study, it was aimed to compare the removal torques of a dental implant placed in different sockets in a mandible model with implant handpiece and torque ratchet. In the study, four identical slotswere made for an implant with a diameter of 3,7 mm and a length of 10 mm in the tooth regions 33, 43, 36, 46 on a mandibular model. The implant was placed with a implant handpiece at a speed of 30 rpm and a torque of 30 Ncm. Removal torques of the implant, which was placed and removed 120 times in total, were examined in two groups, and measured with a torque wrench in the 1st group and with the implant handpiece in the 2nd group. The removal torque of the implant, which was placed 30 times in each area, was found to be 27,58 ± 7,34 Ncm with the implant handpiece and 28,67 ± 4,68 Ncm with torque ratchet. There was no statistically significant difference between the methods in terms of removal torque values (p> 0,05). It has been observed that the implant removal torque values measured by both the implant handpiece and the torque ratchet were similar.

Keywords

Implant, ımplant handpiece ınsertion torque, removal torque

References

• 1. Oshida Y, Tuna EB, Aktören O, Gençay K. Dental Implant Systems Review. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010;11(4):1580-1678.
• 2. Kwon YS, Namgoong H, Kim JH, Cho IH, Kim MD, Eom TG, Koo KT. Effect of microthreads on removal torque and boneto-implant contact: an experimental study in miniature pigs. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2013;43(1): 41-46.
• 3. Yamaguchi Y, Shiota M, Munakata M, Kasugai S, Ozeki M. Effect of implant design on primary stability using torquetime curves in artificial bone. Int J Implant Dent. 2015;1(1):21.
• 4. Faot F, Bielemann AM, Schuster AJ, Marcello-Machado RM, Del Bel Cury AA, Nascimento GG, Chagas-Junior OL. Influence of Insertion Torque on Clinical and Biological Outcomes before and after Loading of Mandibular Implant-Retained Overdentures in Atrophic Edentulous Mandibles. Biomed Res Int. 2019;(2019):8132520.
• 5. Rozé J, Babu S, Saffarzadeh A, Gayet‐ Delacroix M, Hoornaert, A, Layrolle P. Correlating implant stability to bone structure. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20(10):1140–1145.
• 6. Greenstein G and Cavallaro J. Implant insertion torque: its role in achieving primary stability of restorable dental implants. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2017;38(2):88–96.
• 7. Gallucci GO, Benic GI, Eckert SE et al. Consensus statements and clinical recommendations for implant loading protocols. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29:287–290.
• 8. Walker LR, Morris GA, Novotny PJ. Implant insertional torque values predict outcomes. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2011;69(5):1344-1349.
• 9. Degidi M, Perrotti V, Strocchi R, et al. Is insertion torque correlated to bone-implant contact percentage in the early healing period? A histological and histomorphometrical evaluation of 17 human-retrieved dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20(8):778-81.
• 10. Kim DG, Park CJ, Cho LR. Comparative analysis of the implant torque controller. J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci. 2012;28(1):27-36.
• 11. Ko BD, Son K, Kang SH, Lee KB. Accuracy of different electronic torque drivers: A comparative evaluation. J Adv Prosthodont. 2019;11(6):350-357.
• 12. Gross M, Kozak D, Laufer BZ, Weiss EI. Manual closing torque in five implant abutment systems: an in vitro comparative study. J Prosthet Dent. 1999;81(5):574- 578.
• 13. Burguete RL, Johns RB, King T, Patterson EA. Tightening characteristics for screwed joints in osseointegrated dental implants. J Prosthet Dent. 1994;71(6):592-9.
• 14. Goheen KL, Vermilyea SG, Vossoughi J, Agar JR. Torque generated by handheld screwdrivers and mechanical torquing devices for osseointegrated implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants.1994;16(9):149- 55.
• 15. Dellinges M, Curtis D. Effects of infection control procedures on the accuracy of a new mechanical torque wrench system for implant restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 1996;75(1):93-8.