« Prev |
2024 Oct-Dec; Vol 15, No 4:e2 |
Next » |
e2 |
The Interrelation between Cortical Bone Thickness and Primary and Secondary Dental Implant Stability: a Systematic Review J Oral Maxillofac Res 2024;15(4):e2 doi:10.5037/jomr.2024.15402 Abstract | HTML | PDF |
The Interrelation between Cortical Bone Thickness and Primary and Secondary Dental Implant Stability: a Systematic Review
1Department of Maxillofacial surgery, Lithuanian University Of Health Sciences Medical Academy, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Corresponding Author:
Sommarlustvägen 10, 29142 Kristianstad
Sweden
Phone: +46 737 55 18 44
E-mail: halahaljuboori@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Dental implants have emerged as a reliable and long-lasting solution for missing teeth, offering advantages over traditional prosthetic options. The aim of this systematic review was to thoroughly explore the correlation between cortical bone thickness of the jaws and bone-level dental implant primary and secondary stability.
Material and Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in MEDLINE (PubMed), ClinicalKey and the Cochrane Library from 1 January, 2019 to 21 June, 2024. This review focused on patients undergoing dental implant placement with varying cortical bone thicknesses and implant stability levels. Quality and risk-of-bias assessment evaluated by Cochrane risk of bias tool.
Results: Out of 160 screened articles, 28 were reviewed in full, and 6 met the inclusion criteria, involving 209 patients and 418 implants. Implant stability quotient (ISQ) values showed no significant correlations during baseline and secondary assessments (P > 0.05). Correlations were noted between implant stability, bone density, alveolar ridge width, and implant size (P < 0.01). ISQ and insertion torque value (ITV) were strongly correlated at insertion (P < 0.001) but not at follow-ups (P = 0.059 at 2 months, P = 0.817 at 6 months, P = 0.029 at 12 months). ISQ values increased over time (P < 0.001). Implants in native bone showed higher ISQ values at baseline (P = 0.011), 8 weeks (P = 0.013), and 12 weeks (P < 0.001). Regions with thicker cortical bone demonstrated superior primary stability.
Conclusions: Thicker cortical bone enhances primary implant stability, as indicated by higher insertion torque and implant stability quotient values.
J Oral Maxillofac Res 2024;15(4):e2
doi: 10.5037/jomr.2024.15402
Accepted for publication: 30 December 2024
Keywords: cortical bone; dental implantation; immediate dental implant loading; osseointegration.
INTRODUCTION
The utilization of dental implants for oral rehabilitation has gained increasing importance in recent times due to its potential to replace missing teeth, thereby restoring aesthetic appeal and masticatory function in patients [1]. This dental procedure has emerged as an effective solution for individuals who have lost their teeth due to aging, injury, or disease. The use of dental implants involves the surgical placement of artificial tooth roots into the jawbone, which serves as anchors for the replacement teeth [2]. Dental implant therapy has proven to be a reliable, predictable, and long-lasting solution for patients with missing teeth, offering numerous benefits over traditional prosthetic options. Moreover, dental implants have become a widely accepted and preferred treatment modality among patients seeking dental rehabilitation [1-3]. The success rate of such implants ranges between 90 to 95% over a follow-up period of 10 years [4]. In order to be considered fully osseointegrated, endosseous implants must meet a set of well-established criteria that indicate their efficacy and reliability [5].
The level of stability of an implant at the time of surgery is an extremely important factor in determining when the prosthetic can be loaded. This stability is primarily achieved through the interlocking between the implant and the surrounding bone so called, primary implant stability (PIS) [6]. On the other hand, secondary implant stability (SIS) relies on the regeneration and remodelling of the bone after the implant has been placed [7]. Various factors, including the quality and quantity of the bone, insertion torque value (ITV) the surgical technique used, and the size and surface characteristics of the implant, all play a significant role in achieving stability. Therefore, it is crucial to take these factors into consideration in order to achieve the best possible outcomes for implant procedures [8-10].
The aim of this systematic review was to thoroughly explore the correlation between cortical bone thickness of the jaws and bone-level dental implant primary and secondary stability.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Protocol registration
A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Review Analysis and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines [11].
The study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). Prospero registration number: CRD42024541288. The protocol can be accessed at:
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024541288
Focus question
The following focus questions were framed according to the problem, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) process (Table 1): Does cortical bone thickness affect the primary and secondary implants’ stability? Is this relationship consistent over time as indicated by ITV and implant stability quotient (ISQ) values at different intervals?
Table 1 PICO guidelines ISQ = implant stability quotient. |
Participants/population
Patients who have undergo implantation in cortical bone.
Types of publication
The studies included were peer-reviewed studies involving humans and published in English language published during the last five years (from 1 January, 2019 to 21 June, 2024): randomized controlled trials, cohort studies (prospective or retrospective cohort), cross-sectional studies, clinical trials.
Types of studies
The review included series trials, availability of at least one experimental and/or a control group, clinical studies evaluating the implant stability depending on cortical bone thickness in the maxilla and/or mandible. In addition, preoperative/postoperative measurements and follow-up were included.
Information sources
The information source was the databases of MEDLINE (PubMed), ClinicalKey (Elsevier) and the Cochrane Library. Reference lists of selected articles were manually searched for additional relevant publications. Grey literature, letters, editorials, doctoral dissertations, abstract case series, case reports, studies, reviews, unpublished literature were not included in the search strategy of this systematic review.
Search strategy
Publications were searched from January 1, 2019, until June 21, 2024, based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) [11]
The heading keywords and MeSH terms, or combinations of them and their related terms (synonyms and hyponyms) that were used in the search strategy were: “Cortical bone thickness”, “Implant stability”, “Bone level”, “Immediate implant” and “Osseointegration”. The boolean operator “OR” was used to search for each PICO element concept, including MeSH or Emtree terms, as well as their related entry terms or synonyms. On the other hand, “AND” was utilized when searching for the concepts of the three PICO framework elements, namely population, intervention, and outcome.
Selection criteria
Clinical studies assessing the cortical bone thickness and implant stability immediately after placement and after osseointegration. There were no constraints regarding the number of patients treated and the protocol of application of the implants. The selection criteria, which is also known as inclusion and exclusion criteria, used in the study are based on PICO criteria.
Inclusion and exclusion criteria for the study selection
Inclusion criteria
-
Studies on humans.
-
Studies with an outcome correlation between cortical bone thickness and implant stability
-
Cohort (prospective studies or retrospective studies) studies and randomized controlled trials.
-
Only recent studies not older than five years.
-
Studies in English language.
Exclusion criteria
-
Studies not conforming the inclusion criteria.
-
Experts’ opinion.
-
Cadaver and animal studies, in vivo and in vitro studies.
-
Reviews and meta-analysis.
-
Case reports.
-
Unclear description of the procedure.
Selection of studies
The titles of the identified reports underwent independent screening by two reviewers (H.J. and Z.P.) in accordance with the predefined inclusion criteria. Subsequently, additional reviewer (D.R.) conducted meticulous checks to identify and rectify any potential typographical errors. Upon review of the summary, a determination was made indicating the relevance of the study to the search topic, prompting a comprehensive full-text analysis for the selected articles. Any disparities were diligently addressed through deliberation with the senior investigator (D.R.). Furthermore, reviewer consistency was verified using Cohen’s kappa coefficient (κ) values to ensure the requisite inter-rater reliability for both abstract and title, based on a representative 10% sample of the publications.
Quality assessment
During the evaluation process, the potential for bias was analysed at the outcome level using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing the risk of bias [12]. Five key quality criteria were considered:
- Random sequence generation.
- Allocation concealment.
- Blinding of participants and personnel.
- Incomplete outcome data.
- Selective reporting.
Each study was categorized as having low, moderate, or high risk based on the assessment of these criteria [12]. A study was considered to have low risk if all criteria were positive or if only one variable was unclear or absent. Moderate risk was assigned if two variables were unclear and/or absent, and high risk was determined if more than two variables were absent.
Statistical analysis
Initially, a comprehensive literature review and meta-analysis that included both qualitative and quantitative components were conducted. However, due to the significant diversity of the data, it was determined that a quantitative analysis could not be performed via meta-analysis. The level of P-value was set considered statistically significant at P < 0.05.
As a result, the systematic review was limited to a descriptive analysis of the information retrieved, without a quantitative evaluation. Nonetheless, the review was still able to identify and analyse significant data for statistical purposes.
Statistical information was presented as the mean and standard deviation (mean [SD]), which provided a clear and concise method of expressing the results.
RESULTS
Study selection
The results were retrieved and selected for full-text screening. The search provided 392 articles (Figure 1). After filtrating according to the inclusion criteria and duplicates removed (232 articles removed), 160 articles were included in the title and abstract screening. In total, 28 articles were selected for full-text screened according to the inclusion criteria. Six studies were included in the literature review which accomplished the inclusion criteria.
Figure 1 PRISMA flow chart of the selection of the articles. |
Cohen’s kappa coefficient (κ) values were computed at each stage of screening. The title yielded a κ of 0.5, signifying moderate agreement; the abstract showed a κ of 0.84, indicating almost perfect agreement; and the full-text review resulted in a κ of 1.00, signifying perfect agreement.
Exclusion of studies
After full-text review, 22 articles were excluded: one article was not related and conducted on animals [13], two articles were in vitro studies [14,15], sixteen articles due to analysis without the correlation between implant stability [16-31] and three articles provided not enough information [32-34].
Study characteristics
This systematic review includes six articles: prospective study [35], observational clinical study [36], randomized controlled trial [37], clinical study [38], prospective cohort studies [39-40] (Table 2).
Table 2 Description of studies included in the review N = number; NR = not reported; CBCT = cone-beam computed tomography; OPG = orthopantomogram; RFA = resonance frequency analysis. |
Risk of bias in individual studies
Out of the six articles included, three studies [35-37] exhibited a low risk, whereas the remaining three [38-40] were associated with a moderate risk (Figure 2 and 3).
Figure 2 Assessing the risk of bias of included publications in this study. + = low; - = some concerns; D1 = bias arising from randomizing process; D2 = bias due to deviation from intended intervention; D3 = bias due to missing outcome data; D4 = bias of measurement of the outcome; D5 = bias in selection of the reported result. |
Figure 3 Assessment of risk of bias summary. D1 = bias arising from randomizing process; D2 = bias due to deviation from intended intervention; D3 = bias due to missing outcome data; D4 = bias of measurement of the outcome; D5 = bias in selection of the reported result. |
Clinical characteristics
A total of 263 patients were potential participants of which 418 implants were placed (Table 2). The imaging modality employed for evaluating the PIS and SIS was cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) [35-38]. Alternative diagnostic methodologies have been utilized to gauge ISQ of dental implants, including resonance frequency analysis (RFA) [39] and the integration diagnostics to determine the ISQ using Osstell™ device (Osstell AB; Gothenburg, Sweden) [40].
In this systematic review, six articles employed different implant materials. One study [35] utilized the Straumann® system (Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland), while another [36] used the BEGO Implant system (BEGO GmbH & Co. KG; Bremen, Germany). The NobelActive® implant (Nobel Biocare AB; Gothenburg, Sweden) was employed in study [37], and AB Dental Implants (AB Dental Devices Ltd.; Ashdod, Israel) were used in study [38]. The Zimmer TSV implant (Zimmer Biomet Dental; Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, USA) was implemented in study [39], and finally, the DIO Implant system (DIO Corporation; Busan, South Korea) was utilized in study [40].
Clinical assessment
In a study conducted by Feng et al. [35], the correlation between cortical bone thickness and implant stability was examined. The study focused on primary stability, which is influenced by bone-to-implant contact (CBIC) and bone microstructure evaluated through CBCT. A total of 22 patients with 65 implants were involved in the study (Table 2). ITVs and ISQ values were used to assess primary stability, measured immediately after implant placement and three months postoperatively. The results showed that ITV was significantly linked to the surface area of CBIC (P = 0.006), bone volume fraction, and bone surface fraction (BS/BV) (P = 0.025), but no significant correlations were found with ISQ values during baseline and secondary assessments (P > 0.05) (Table 3). The study concluded that preoperative CBCT assessments could potentially predict ITV, thus aiding in the anticipation of ISQ, although ISQ values were not effectively predicted by these measurements.
Table 3 Primary and secondary implant stability N = number; NR = not reported; SD = standard deviation. |
de Elio Oliveros et al. [36], evaluated the connection between alveolar bone density, as measured by Hounsfield Units (HUs) through CBCT and PIS was examined in 48 patients with 160 implants (Table 2). PIS, which is essential for successful implant integration, was evaluated using both the ISQ from resonance frequency analysis and ITV. The study revealed that ISQ values had a significant correlation with the alveolar ridge width in the coronal (P < 0.05), middle (P < 0.01), and apical (P < 0.01) thirds of the bone (Table 3). ISQs were also higher with larger-diameter implants (P < 0.01). Moreover, a strong correlation (P < 0.001) was observed between ISQ and ITV. These findings suggest that preoperative CBCT measurements of bone density can help anticipate the primary stability of dental implants and thus contribute to treatment planning.
A split-mouth randomized controlled trial conducted by Daher et al. [37] investigated the factors affecting ISQ in the posterior maxilla using NobelActive® (Nobel Biocare AB; Gothenburg, Sweden) a variable-thread tapered implants. A total of 26 patients were enrolled in the study; however, ISQ recordings were obtained for only 18 patients due to logistic problems during the trial and the treatment of the first 8 patients. The enrolled patients received each 3 to 4 implants in maxillary premolar-molar sextants, resulting in a total of 120 implants placed: 60 implants immediately loaded and 60 inserted according to the delayed loading protocol (Table 2). The study compared immediate loading of provisional prostheses to conventional loading on the contralateral side. PIS was assessed by measuring ITVs and ISQ in four directions. SIS was measured by ISQ at definitive prosthesis delivery (3 to 3.5 months postoperatively) and 12 months after definitive loading. The results indicated that there were no significant differences in ISQ values between the two loading protocols at any point in time (P > 0.05), implying that immediate loading did not affect implant stability (Table 3). ISQs increased over time in both loading protocols, with P-values indicating statistical significance (P < 0.001) at each time interval assessed.
In a recent study by Ivanova et al. [38], the link between PIS and SIS, bone density, and the percentage of vital bone formation was investigated in 90 patients who underwent a socket preservation procedure followed by dental implant placement (Table 2). The results indicate that primary stability was positively correlated with bone density (P < 0.001) and the percentage of new bone formation (P < 0.001) (Table 3). Similarly, there was a significant association between SIS and these parameters (P < 0.001 for bone density and P < 0.001 for new bone formation). To evaluate the internal bone structure, histomorphometric analysis was conducted during surgical re-entry, and CBCT scans were used to assess bone density pre-operatively. This detailed examination suggests a strong interrelation between cortical bone density, bone formation, and implant stability, supporting the idea that both primary implant stability and secondary implant stability after osseointegration are influenced significantly by these factors.
Vallecillo et al. [39] conducted a prospective cohort study comparing implant stability in regenerated versus non-regenerated bone and assessing the impact of bone quality on implant stability outcomes. The study involved 31 patients and 60 implants with 30 in native bone and 30 in regenerated bone using xenograft bovine bone (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, IN, USA) and a resorbable collagen membrane (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, IN, USA) (Table 2). RFA was used to measure the ISQ at baseline, 8 weeks, and 12 weeks post-implant placement. The results showed statistically significant differences in ISQ values between implants placed in regenerated and native bone at all measured time points, with native bone consistently showing higher ISQ values at baseline (P = 0.011), at 8 weeks (P = 0.013), and at 12 weeks (P < 0.001 (Table 3). The study demonstrated that while implants in regenerated bone showed adequate stability for prosthetic loading, those in native bone achieved higher stability values, suggesting that bone quality influences primary stability but not SIS.
A prospective parallel cohort study conducted by Cassetta et al. [40] investigated the correlation between cortical bone thickness, ITV and ISQ. The study involved 142 subjects who received a total of 268 dental implants (Table 2). ITV and ISQ values were recorded to assess primary stability at implant insertion, while secondary stability was evaluated at 2, 6, and 12 months post-implantation. The results showed a strong correlation between ITV and ISQ at implant insertion (T0) with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.494 and a P-value of < 0.001, indicating that the mechanical force used during implant insertion plays a crucial role in initial implant stability. However, there was no significant correlation between ITV and ISQ at the 2-month (T1) follow-up (Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.172, P = 0.059), 6-month (T2) follow-up (Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.021, P = 0.817), and 12-month (T3) follow-up (Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.199, P = 0.029), suggesting that high ITV does not guarantee better long-term stability measured by ISQ. The study concluded that while initial mechanical stability is important, it should not be solely relied upon to predict long-term osseointegration success.
DISCUSSION
The aim was to analyse the correlation between cortical bone thickness and implant stability, with a focus on primary mechanical implant stability and secondary stability after implant osseointegration. A total of six articles were selected based on predefined eligibility criteria. However, the analysis revealed significant methodological differences between studies and heterogenic results. Nevertheless, the qualitative assessment revealed a positive association between greater cortical bone thickness and higher PIS at the time of implant insertion. Furthermore, the findings emphasized that while high ITV which reflect initial mechanical stability are highly correlated with primary stability and that they cannot reliably predict secondary stability outcomes over time. This review highlights the intricacy of predicting long-term implant success from initial stability metrics, underscoring the need for comprehensive preoperative assessments of bone quality.
In a study by Wang et al. [41], examined the relationship between cortical bone thickness, bone density measured in HU using CBCT and the primary stability of dental implants. The results revealed that cortical bone thickness, and implant length, both positively correlated with ITVs and ISQ values. The findings suggest that increased cortical bone thickness contributes significantly to both initial mechanical stability and measured stability over time SIS, as demonstrated by the correlation between cortical bone thickness and ITVs (P < 0.001) and ISQ values (P < 0.001). The study also found significant correlations between the voxel values obtained from CBCT scans and ITVs (P < 0.001), but the correlation with ISQ values varied depending on implant dimensions. Other studies have shown statistical analysis that revealed significant correlations in the association between gender and cortical thickness variations across different mandibular regions, with P ≤ 0.05 considered statistically significant for all comparisons [42-43].
According to a research conducted by do Vale Souza et al. [44], there is a correlation between ITV and ISQ values. The study demonstrated a positive correlation between ITV and initial ISQ values measured on the day of implant placement, suggesting that higher insertion torque leads to greater primary stability. However, this study argued weakly against the findings of previous studies. It revealed that after six months, no significant correlation was observed between ITV and ISQ values, indicating that insertion torque is not a reliable predictor of secondary stability following osseointegration.
Limitations
Although the study’s approach is comprehensive, it is important to acknowledge several limitations. The relatively small sample size limits the statistical significance of the findings and their generalizability to a larger population. Additionally, the participants were from a single geographic region, which may not reflect the variation in bone density values [41], other factors affecting the bone health [45] and quality [46]. Moreover, RFA accuracy can be influenced by operator technique and the specific device used, potentially affecting the reliability of the results [47]. Furthermore, the majority of the included studies’ follow-up period was relatively short. Finally, a large heterogeneity in this study was observed, whereas different implant systems, types, insertion torque and surface textures were used among participants, which can significantly affect osseointegration and stability, potentially introducing additional variability in the results.
CONCLUSIONS
The findings indicate that implants situated in regions with thicker cortical bone exhibited superior primary stability, as indicated by their higher insertion torque value and implant stability quotient values. Additionally, there may be a possibility of significant correlation between the secondary implant stability quotient and cortical bone thickness, which indicates the need for additional research in this area.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS
The authors report no conflicts of interest related to this study.
REFERENCES
- Gulati K, Chopra D, Kocak-Oztug NA, Verron E. Fit and forget: The future of dental implant therapy via nanotechnology. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2023 Aug;199:114900.
[Medline: 37263543] [doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2023.114900] - Carosi P, Ferrigno N, Arcuri C, Laureti M. Computer-Aided Surgery and Immediate Loading to Rehabilitate Complete Arch with Four Dental Implants and Fixed Screw-Retained Prosthesis Up to 4 Years in Function: A Retrospective Study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2021 Nov-Dec;36(6):1180-1187.
[Medline: 34919619] [doi: 10.11607/jomi.8946] - Zhang Y, Gulati K, Li Z, Di P, Liu Y. Dental Implant Nano-Engineering: Advances, Limitations and Future Directions. Nanomaterials (Basel). 2021 Sep 24;11(10):2489.
[Medline: 34684930] [PMC free article: 8538755] [doi: 10.3390/nano11102489] - Howe MS, Keys W, Richards D. Long-term (10-year) dental implant survival: A systematic review and sensitivity meta-analysis. J Dent. 2019 May;84:9-21.
[Medline: 30904559] [doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2019.03.008] - Tanaka K, Sailer I, Iwama R, Yamauchi K, Nogami S, Yoda N, Takahashi T. Relationship between cortical bone thickness and implant stability at the time of surgery and secondary stability after osseointegration measured using resonance frequency analysis. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 2018 Dec 27;48(6):360-372.
[Medline: 30619637] [PMC free article: 6312875] [doi: 10.5051/jpis.2018.48.6.360] - de Oliveira Nicolau Mantovani AK, de Mattias Sartori IA, Azevedo-Alanis LR, Tiossi R, Fontão FNGK. Influence of cortical bone anchorage on the primary stability of dental implants. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018 Sep;22(3):297-301.
[Medline: 29876688] [doi: 10.1007/s10006-018-0705-y] - Huang H, Wu G, Hunziker E. The clinical significance of implant stability quotient (ISQ) measurements: A literature review. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2020 Oct-Dec;10(4):629-638.
[Medline: 32983857] [PMC free article: 7494467] [doi: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2020.07.004] - Monje A, Ravidà A, Wang HL, Helms JA, Brunski JB. Relationship Between Primary/Mechanical and Secondary/Biological Implant Stability. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019 Suppl;34:s7-s23.
[Medline: 31116830] [doi: 10.11607/jomi.19suppl.g1] - Tavelli L, Barootchi S, Avila-Ortiz G, Urban IA, Giannobile WV, Wang HL. Peri-implant soft tissue phenotype modification and its impact on peri-implant health: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Periodontol.2021 Jan;92(1):21-44.
[Medline: 32710810] [doi: 10.1002/JPER.19-0716] - Salimov F, Tatli U, Kürkçü M, Akoğlan M, Oztunç H, Kurtoğlu C. Evaluation of relationship between preoperative bone density values derived from cone beam computed tomography and implant stability parameters: a clinical study.Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014 Sep;25(9):1016-21.
[Medline: 23772811] [doi: 10.1111/clr.12219] - Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097.
[Medline: 19621072] [PMC free article: 2707599] [doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097] - McGuinness LA, Higgins JPT. Risk-of-bias VISualization (robvis): An R package and Shiny web app for visualizing risk-of-bias assessments. Res Synth Methods. 2021 Jan;12(1):55-61.
[Medline: 32336025] [doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1411] - Hao CP, Cao NJ, Zhu YH, Wang W. The osseointegration and stability of dental implants with different surface treatments in animal models: a network meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2021 Jul 5;11(1):13849.
[Medline: 34226607] [PMC free article: 8257659] [doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-93307-4] - Falco A, Berardini M, Trisi P. Correlation Between Implant Geometry, Implant Surface, Insertion Torque, and Primary Stability: In Vitro Biomechanical Analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018 Jul/Aug;33(4):824-830.
[Medline: 30024998] [doi: [doi: 10.11607/jomi.6285] - Ibrahim A, Heitzer M, Bock A, Peters F, Möhlhenrich SC, Hölzle F, Modabber A, Kniha K. Relationship between Implant Geometry and Primary Stability in Different Bony Defects and Variant Bone Densities: An In Vitro Study. Materials (Basel). 2020 Sep 30;13(19):4349.
[Medline: 33007841] [PMC free article: 7579538] [doi: 10.3390/ma13194349] - Emmert M, Gülses A, Behrens E, Karayürek F, Acil Y, Wiltfang J, Spille JH. An experimental study on the effects of the cortical thickness and bone density on initial mechanical anchorage of different Straumann® implant designs. Int J Implant Dent. 2021 Aug 30;7(1):83.
[Medline: 34458954] [PMC free article: 8403613] [doi: 10.1186/s40729-021-00367-2] - Pandey V, Kathuria N.S, Kumar S, Singh R, Ayusha. Relationship between the bone density estimated by cone-beam computed tomography and the primary stability of dental implants. Int J of Health Sci. 2021 Dec;5(S2):423-30.[doi: 10.53730/ijhs.v5nS2.5864]
- Merheb J, Vercruyssen M, Coucke W, Quirynen M. Relationship of implant stability and bone density derived from computerized tomography images. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2018 Feb;20(1):50-57.
[Medline: 29277972] [doi: 10.1111/cid.12579] - Verdugo F, Laksmana T, D'Addona A, Uribarri A. Facial cortical bone regeneration post-extraction in non-grafted sockets allows for early implant placement and long-term functional stability. Arch Oral Biol. 2020 Apr;112:104678.
[Medline: 32062103] [doi: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2020.104678] - Aragoneses JM, Aragoneses J, Brugal VA, Gomez M, Suarez A. Relationship between Implant Length and Implant Stability of Single-Implant Restorations: A 12-Month Follow-Up Clinical Study. Medicina (Kaunas).2020 May 27;56(6):263.
[Medline: 32471305] [PMC free article: 7353855] [doi: 10.3390/medicina56060263] - Wang SH, Ko YC, Tsai MT, Fuh LJ, Huang HL, Shen YW, Hsu JT. Can Male Patient's Age Affect the Cortical Bone Thickness of Jawbone for Dental Implant Placement? A Cohort Study. Int J Environ Res Public Health.2021 Apr 18;18(8):4284.
[Medline: 33919492] [PMC free article: 8072602] [doi: 10.3390/ijerph18084284] - Lombardi T, Berton F, Salgarello S, Barbalonga E, Rapani A, Piovesana F, Gregorio C, Barbati G, Di Lenarda R, Stacchi C. Factors Influencing Early Marginal Bone Loss around Dental Implants Positioned Subcrestally: A Multicenter Prospective Clinical Study. J Clin Med. 2019 Aug 4;8(8):1168.
[Medline: 31382675] [PMC free article: 6723035] [doi: 10.3390/jcm8081168] - Rossi M, Bruno G, De Stefani A, Perri A, Gracco A. Quantitative CBCT evaluation of maxillary and mandibular cortical bone thickness and density variability for orthodontic miniplate placement. Int Orthod. 2017 Dec;15(4):610-624.
[Medline: 29113844] [doi: 10.1016/j.ortho.2017.09.003] - Ranka M. Awareness And Willingness For Dental Implants Among Patients: A Study. IJMSDH. 2020 Dec;6(12):1-4. [URL: https://www.ijmsdh.org/index.php/ijmsdh/article/view/65]
- Muangsisied S, Chantarapanich N, Veerasakul MS, Inglam S, Effect of Implant Diameter and Cortical Bone Thickness on Biomechanical Performance of Short Dental Implant-Supported Distal Cantilever: A Finite Element Study, Engineering J. 2021 Feb;25(2):175-82. [doi: 10.4186/ej.2021.25.2.175]
- Kim JH, Lim YJ, Kim B, Lee J. How Do Parameters of Implant Primary Stability Correspond with CT-Evaluated Bone Quality in the Posterior Maxilla? A Correlation Analysis. Materials (Basel). 2021 Jan 7;14(2):270.
[Medline: 33430383] [PMC free article: 7828085] [doi: 10.3390/ma14020270] - Kim GT, Jin J, Mangal U, Lee KJ, Kim KM, Choi SH, Kwon JS. Primary Stability of Orthodontic Titanium Miniscrews due to Cortical Bone Density and Re-Insertion. Materials (Basel). 2020 Oct 5;13(19):4433.
[Medline: 33028011] [PMC free article: 7579606] [doi: 10.3390/ma13194433] - Rues S, Schmitter M, Kappel S, Sonntag R, Kretzer JP, Nadorf J. Effect of bone quality and quantity on the primary stability of dental implants in a simulated bicortical placement. Clin Oral Investig. 2021 Mar;25(3):1265-1272.
[Medline: 32651646] [PMC free article: 7878229] [doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03432-z] - Gómez-Polo M, Ortega R, Gómez-Polo C, Martín C, Celemín A, Del Río J. Does Length, Diameter, or Bone Quality Affect Primary and Secondary Stability in Self-Tapping Dental Implants? J Oral Maxillofac Surg.2016 Jul;74(7):1344-53.
[Medline: 27070843] [doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2016.03.011] - Baek YW, Lim YJ, Kim B. Comparison of Implant Surgery Methods of Cortical Tapping and Cortical Widening in Bone of Various Density: A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Study. Materials (Basel). 2023 Apr 21;16(8):3261.
[Medline: 37110097] [PMC free article: 10146056] [doi: 10.3390/ma16083261] - Borges T, Fernandes D, Almeida B, Pereira M, Martins D, Azevedo L, Marques T. Correlation between alveolar bone morphology and volumetric dimensional changes in immediate maxillary implant placement: A 1-year prospective cohort study. J Periodontol. 2020 Sep;91(9):1167-1176.
[Medline: 32012271] [doi: 10.1002/JPER.19-0606] - de Carvalho Formiga M, Grzech-Leśniak K, Moraschini V, Shibli JA, Neiva R. Effects of Osseodensification on Immediate Implant Placement: Retrospective Analysis of 211 Implants. Materials (Basel). 2022 May 15;15(10):3539.
[Medline: 35629566] [PMC free article: 9147081] [doi: 10.3390/ma15103539] - Yeh YT, Chu TG, Blanchard SB, Hamada Y. Effects on Ridge Dimensions, Bone Density, and Implant Primary Stability with Osseodensification Approach in Implant Osteotomy Preparation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants.2021 May-Jun;36(3):474-484.
[Medline: 34115061] [doi: [doi: 10.11607/jomi.8540] - Kim GT, Jin J, Mangal U, Lee KJ, Kim KM, Choi SH, Kwon JS. Primary Stability of Orthodontic Titanium Miniscrews due to Cortical Bone Density and Re-Insertion. Materials (Basel). 2020 Oct 5;13(19):4433.
[Medline: 33028011] [PMC free article: 7579606] [doi: 10.3390/ma13194433] - Feng L, Chen H, Chen Z, Chen Y, Gu X. Associations between cortical bone-to-implant contact and microstructure derived from CBCT and implant primary stability. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2023 Mar;34(3):243-253.
[Medline: 36727924] [doi: 10.1111/clr.14037] - de Elío Oliveros J, Del Canto Díaz A, Del Canto Díaz M, Orea CJ, Del Canto Pingarrón M, Calvo JS. Alveolar Bone Density and Width Affect Primary Implant Stability. J Oral Implantol. 2020 Aug 1;46(4):389-395.
[Medline: 32221558] [doi: 10.1563/aaid-joi-D-19-00028] - Daher FI, Abi-Aad HL, Dimassi HI, Baba NZ, Majzoub ZA. Factors Affecting Implant Stability Quotients at Immediately and Conventionally Loaded Implants in the Posterior Maxilla: A Split-Mouth Randomized Controlled Trial. J Prosthodont. 2021 Aug;30(7):590-603.
[Medline: 33215755] [doi: 10.1111/jopr.13296] - Ivanova V, Chenchev I, Zlatev S, Mijiritsky E. Correlation between Primary, Secondary Stability, Bone Density, Percentage of Vital Bone Formation and Implant Size. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jun 30;18(13):6994.
[Medline: 34208849] [PMC free article: 8297224] [doi: 10.3390/ijerph18136994] - Vallecillo-Rivas M, Reyes-Botella C, Vallecillo C, Lisbona-González MJ, Vallecillo-Capilla M, Olmedo-Gaya MV. Comparison of Implant Stability between Regenerated and Non-Regenerated Bone. A Prospective Cohort Study. J Clin Med. 2021 Jul 21;10(15):3220.
[Medline: 34362004] [PMC free article: 8347999] [doi: 10.3390/jcm10153220] - Cassetta M, Brandetti G, Altieri F. Are the Insertion Torque Value and Implant Stability Quotient Correlated, and If So, Can Insertion Torque Values Predict Secondary Implant Stability? A Prospective Parallel Cohort Study.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2022 Jan-Feb;37(1):135-142.
[Medline: 35235632] [doi: 10.11607/jomi.9064] - Wang SH, Shen YW, Fuh LJ, Peng SL, Tsai MT, Huang HL, Hsu JT. Relationship between Cortical Bone Thickness and Cancellous Bone Density at Dental Implant Sites in the Jawbone. Diagnostics (Basel). 2020 Sep 17;10(9):710.
[Medline: 32957724] [PMC free article: 7555203] [doi: 10.3390/diagnostics10090710] - Bruno V, Berti C, Barausse C, Badino M, Gasparro R, Ippolito DR, Felice P. Clinical Relevance of Bone Density Values from CT Related to Dental Implant Stability: A Retrospective Study. Biomed Res Int. 2018 May 31;2018:6758245.
[Medline: 29955608] [PMC free article: 6000841] [doi: 10.1155/2018/6758245] - Grover R, Gupta R. Anthropometric Analysis of the Human Mandibular Cortical Bone in Indian Population as Assessed by Dental Computed Tomography (DentaScan). World J Dent 2021 Jan-Feb;12(1):42-9.[doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1788]
- do Vale Souza JP, de Moraes Melo Neto CL, Piacenza LT, Freitas da Silva EV, de Melo Moreno AL, Penitente PA, Brunetto JL, Dos Santos DM, Goiato MC. Relation Between Insertion Torque and Implant Stability Quotient: A Clinical Study. Eur J Dent. 2021 Oct;15(4):618-623.
[Medline: 34233364] [PMC free article: 8630976] [doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1725575] - Kowalski J, Lapinska B, Nissan J. Factors Influencing Marginal Bone Loss around Dental Implants: A Narrative Review. Coatings. 2021 Jul;11(7):865. [doi: 10.3390/coatings11070865]
- Romeo D, Sacchi L, Fuchs F, Tetè G, Agliardi E. Experimental analysis of the influence of cortical bone layers and bone quantity on implant primary stability. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2020 Nov-Dec;34(6 Suppl. 3):47-57.
[Medline: 33412780] - Genisa M, Shuib S, Ahmad Rajion ZA, Mohamad D, Arief ME. Dental Implant Monitoring Using Resonance Frequency Analysis (RFA) and Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) Measurement. International Journal of Technology. 2020 Nov;11(5):1015. [doi: 10.14716/ijtech.v11i5.4326]
To cite this article: The Interrelation between Cortical Bone Thickness and Primary and Secondary Dental Implant Stability: a Systematic Review J Oral Maxillofac Res 2024;15(4):e2 URL: http://www.ejomr.org/JOMR/archives/2024/4/e2/v15n4e2ht.htm |
Received: 1 September 2024 | Accepted: 30 December 2024 | Published: 31 December 2024
Copyright: © The Author(s). Published by JOMR under CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 licence, 2024.