Assessment of Implant Stability in Immediate Implant Placement using Different Bone Grafting materials: A Clinical Study

Jalaluddin M 1 , Sathe S 2 , Thomas J 3 , Haleem S 4 , Naik S 5 , Shivanna MM 6

Affiliations 

  • 1 Department of Periodontics and Oral Implantology, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, KIIT Deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
  • 2 Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Bhabha College of Dental Sciences, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India
  • 3 Department of Prosthodontics, Al Azhar Dental College, Thodupuzha, Kerala, India
  • 4 Dental Health Care Department, Inaya Medical College, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
  • 5 Dental Biomaterials Research Chair, Dental Health Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh 1143, Saudi Arabia
  • 6 Department of Community Dentistry, Penang International Dental College, Jalan Bagan, Luar, Butterworth, Penang, Malaysia
J Pharm Bioallied Sci, 2021 Jun;13(Suppl 1):S612-S615.
PMID: 34447164 DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_627_20

Abstract

Aim: The aim of the present study was to assess the implant stability in immediate implant placement using different bone grafting materials.

Materials and Methods: Twelve patients (5 males, 7 females, range of 40-58 years) were included in the study. All patients were divided into two groups based on the graft material used. For Group 1, Xenograft bone grafting material was used, and for Group 2, Freeze-dried bone allograft was used. The patients were suggested to rinse with 0.2% chlorhexidine mouth wash for 1 min. Periotome was used for atraumatic tooth extraction, and necessary care was taken to avoid fracture of socket wall. The implant was placed with respective bone grafting materials. An Orthopantomogram (OPG) radiograph is taken at the day of the operation to serve as baseline data for the marginal bone level. Clinical and radiological parameters were evaluated at baseline, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months to assess the mean marginal bone level changes. Periotest was used for the measurement of implant stability.

Results: The mean marginal bone level in Group 1 at baseline (13.58 ± 1.09), 3 months (12.64 ± 0.88), 6 months (12.02 ± 1.42), and 12 months (11.20 ± 1.26), respectively. In Group 2, the marginal bone level was at baseline (14.22 ± 0.26), 3 months (13.52 ± 1.28), 6 months (13.10 ± 0.32), and 12 months (12.12 ± 1.26), respectively. There was a statistically significant difference found in both the groups. Moreover, there was no statistically significant differences found between the groups at all the duration on intergroup comparison of the mean marginal bone level. The mean difference of implant stability in Group 1 the implant stability was 188.6 ± 22.5 and in Group 2 was 191.5 ± 18.2, and there was no statistically significant difference found between the groups.

Conclusion: Both bone grafting materials used in the study showed improvement in implant stability and marginal bone levels after immediate placement of implant.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.

Similar publications