Cargando…

Reliability of implant stability measuring devices depending on various clinical conditions: an in vitro study

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of implant stability measuring devices depending on the location of the implant and the position of the patient. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six implants were installed in different dentate sextants of six artificial bone models. Implant stab...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Han-Na, Kim, Myoung-Sub, Lee, Jeong-Yol, Zihan, Xu, Ryu, Jae-Jun, Shim, Ji-Suk
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10333099/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37441716
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2023.15.3.126
_version_ 1785070582497280000
author Lee, Han-Na
Kim, Myoung-Sub
Lee, Jeong-Yol
Zihan, Xu
Ryu, Jae-Jun
Shim, Ji-Suk
author_facet Lee, Han-Na
Kim, Myoung-Sub
Lee, Jeong-Yol
Zihan, Xu
Ryu, Jae-Jun
Shim, Ji-Suk
author_sort Lee, Han-Na
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of implant stability measuring devices depending on the location of the implant and the position of the patient. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six implants were installed in different dentate sextants of six artificial bone models. Implant stability was measured in three conditions of the bone model (without mounting on a phantom head, mounted on a phantom head in supine position, and mounted on a phantom head in upright position). A resonance frequency analysis device (Osstell) and two damping capacity analysis devices (Periotest and Anycheck) were used to measure implant stability. The values measured outside the phantom head were treated as controls, and the values inside the phantom head were compared using an independent t-test. RESULTS: Osstell showed different results in two of the six divisions in both the supine and upright positions compared to outside of the mouth (P < .05). Periotest showed different results in all six parts in the supine position and in five parts in the upright position compared to outside of the mouth (P < .05). While Anycheck showed different results in five areas in the supine position compared to outside of the mouth, it showed different results in only one area in the upright position (P < .05). CONCLUSION: In the difficult implant position for the operator to access, the implant stability measuring devices show less reliability. The accessibility of implant is greatly affected in the order of Osstell, Anycheck, and Periotest.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10333099
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103330992023-07-12 Reliability of implant stability measuring devices depending on various clinical conditions: an in vitro study Lee, Han-Na Kim, Myoung-Sub Lee, Jeong-Yol Zihan, Xu Ryu, Jae-Jun Shim, Ji-Suk J Adv Prosthodont Original Article PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of implant stability measuring devices depending on the location of the implant and the position of the patient. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six implants were installed in different dentate sextants of six artificial bone models. Implant stability was measured in three conditions of the bone model (without mounting on a phantom head, mounted on a phantom head in supine position, and mounted on a phantom head in upright position). A resonance frequency analysis device (Osstell) and two damping capacity analysis devices (Periotest and Anycheck) were used to measure implant stability. The values measured outside the phantom head were treated as controls, and the values inside the phantom head were compared using an independent t-test. RESULTS: Osstell showed different results in two of the six divisions in both the supine and upright positions compared to outside of the mouth (P < .05). Periotest showed different results in all six parts in the supine position and in five parts in the upright position compared to outside of the mouth (P < .05). While Anycheck showed different results in five areas in the supine position compared to outside of the mouth, it showed different results in only one area in the upright position (P < .05). CONCLUSION: In the difficult implant position for the operator to access, the implant stability measuring devices show less reliability. The accessibility of implant is greatly affected in the order of Osstell, Anycheck, and Periotest. The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics 2023-06 2023-06-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10333099/ /pubmed/37441716 http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2023.15.3.126 Text en © 2023 The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Lee, Han-Na
Kim, Myoung-Sub
Lee, Jeong-Yol
Zihan, Xu
Ryu, Jae-Jun
Shim, Ji-Suk
Reliability of implant stability measuring devices depending on various clinical conditions: an in vitro study
title Reliability of implant stability measuring devices depending on various clinical conditions: an in vitro study
title_full Reliability of implant stability measuring devices depending on various clinical conditions: an in vitro study
title_fullStr Reliability of implant stability measuring devices depending on various clinical conditions: an in vitro study
title_full_unstemmed Reliability of implant stability measuring devices depending on various clinical conditions: an in vitro study
title_short Reliability of implant stability measuring devices depending on various clinical conditions: an in vitro study
title_sort reliability of implant stability measuring devices depending on various clinical conditions: an in vitro study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10333099/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37441716
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2023.15.3.126
work_keys_str_mv AT leehanna reliabilityofimplantstabilitymeasuringdevicesdependingonvariousclinicalconditionsaninvitrostudy
AT kimmyoungsub reliabilityofimplantstabilitymeasuringdevicesdependingonvariousclinicalconditionsaninvitrostudy
AT leejeongyol reliabilityofimplantstabilitymeasuringdevicesdependingonvariousclinicalconditionsaninvitrostudy
AT zihanxu reliabilityofimplantstabilitymeasuringdevicesdependingonvariousclinicalconditionsaninvitrostudy
AT ryujaejun reliabilityofimplantstabilitymeasuringdevicesdependingonvariousclinicalconditionsaninvitrostudy
AT shimjisuk reliabilityofimplantstabilitymeasuringdevicesdependingonvariousclinicalconditionsaninvitrostudy