COMPARING THE EFFICACY OF OSSEODENSIFICATION OVER CONVENTIONAL DRILLING TECHNIQUE ON IMPLANT STABILITY AND BONE DENSITY IN LOW BONE DENSITY SITES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

IF 4 4区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Journal of Evidence-Based Dental Practice Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-04 DOI:10.1016/j.jebdp.2025.102132
SHRADDHA SHILPI , MONIKA BANSAL , MAHESH KHAIRNAR , GOKILA VANI SU , ZAINAB AKRAM , RASHIKA M , SAKSHI AGARWAL
{"title":"COMPARING THE EFFICACY OF OSSEODENSIFICATION OVER CONVENTIONAL DRILLING TECHNIQUE ON IMPLANT STABILITY AND BONE DENSITY IN LOW BONE DENSITY SITES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS","authors":"SHRADDHA SHILPI ,&nbsp;MONIKA BANSAL ,&nbsp;MAHESH KHAIRNAR ,&nbsp;GOKILA VANI SU ,&nbsp;ZAINAB AKRAM ,&nbsp;RASHIKA M ,&nbsp;SAKSHI AGARWAL","doi":"10.1016/j.jebdp.2025.102132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose of the research</h3><div>To assess the efficacy of osseodensification (OD) over conventional drilling technique (CD) on implant stability and bone density in low bone density sites.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>An electronic and manual search were conducted to analyze the effect of OD over CD technique on implant stability and bone density in human-based randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized controlled trials (NRCTs). The risk of bias was assessed using (RoB 2.0) and (ROBINS-I) tools for RCTs and NRCTs respectively. The meta-analysis was applied with RevMan 5.4, using the random-fixed effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by a Q test and quantified with I<sup>2</sup> statistics.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Our literature search identified 1454 publications, of which only 6 met all the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis of the included studies showed that the implant stability quotient (ISQ) was greater in OD than in the CD group without being statistically significant both immediately and at the follow-up period after implant placement, with a standardized mean difference of 2.13 [95%CI = −0.08, 4.35] with <em>P</em> = .06 and 1.81 [95%CI = −0.41, 4.03] with <em>P</em> = .11 respectively. The difference in bone density in the OD compared to the CD group was statistically significant, immediately after implant placement with a standardized mean difference of 2.14 [95%CI = 0.68, 3.59] with <em>P</em> = .004 and nonsignificant at 3 to 7 months with a standardized mean difference of 1.54 [95%CI = −0.34, 3.43] with <em>P</em> = .11.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The findings of the present review and meta-analysis show that dental implants placed using the OD technique reveal greater implant stability and improved bone density in areas with low bone density compared to the CD technique. However, more clinical studies are needed to validate the findings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48736,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence-Based Dental Practice","volume":"25 2","pages":"Article 102132"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Evidence-Based Dental Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1532338225000478","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of the research

To assess the efficacy of osseodensification (OD) over conventional drilling technique (CD) on implant stability and bone density in low bone density sites.

Materials and methods

An electronic and manual search were conducted to analyze the effect of OD over CD technique on implant stability and bone density in human-based randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized controlled trials (NRCTs). The risk of bias was assessed using (RoB 2.0) and (ROBINS-I) tools for RCTs and NRCTs respectively. The meta-analysis was applied with RevMan 5.4, using the random-fixed effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by a Q test and quantified with I2 statistics.

Results

Our literature search identified 1454 publications, of which only 6 met all the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis of the included studies showed that the implant stability quotient (ISQ) was greater in OD than in the CD group without being statistically significant both immediately and at the follow-up period after implant placement, with a standardized mean difference of 2.13 [95%CI = −0.08, 4.35] with P = .06 and 1.81 [95%CI = −0.41, 4.03] with P = .11 respectively. The difference in bone density in the OD compared to the CD group was statistically significant, immediately after implant placement with a standardized mean difference of 2.14 [95%CI = 0.68, 3.59] with P = .004 and nonsignificant at 3 to 7 months with a standardized mean difference of 1.54 [95%CI = −0.34, 3.43] with P = .11.

Conclusion

The findings of the present review and meta-analysis show that dental implants placed using the OD technique reveal greater implant stability and improved bone density in areas with low bone density compared to the CD technique. However, more clinical studies are needed to validate the findings.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在低骨密度部位,比较骨密度化与传统钻孔技术对种植体稳定性和骨密度的影响:一项系统综述和荟萃分析
目的探讨低骨密度部位骨增密技术(OD)对种植体稳定性和骨密度的影响。材料与方法采用电子检索和手工检索两种方法,分析了OD与CD技术对种植体稳定性和骨密度的影响,包括基于人的随机对照试验(rct)和非随机对照试验(NRCTs)。分别使用rct和nrct的(rob2.0)和(ROBINS-I)工具评估偏倚风险。meta分析采用RevMan 5.4软件,采用随机固定效应模型。异质性采用Q检验评估,I2统计量量化。结果共检索到1454篇文献,其中只有6篇符合全部纳入标准。纳入研究的荟萃分析显示,OD组种植体稳定商(ISQ)高于CD组,但在种植体放置后立即和随访期间均无统计学意义,标准化平均差异为2.13 [95%CI = −0.08,4.35],P = 。[95%CI = −0.41,4.03],P = 。分别为11。种植体置入后即刻OD组与CD组骨密度差异有统计学意义,标准化平均差异为2.14 [95%CI = 0.68,3.59],P = 。3 ~ 7个月标准化平均差异为1.54 [95%CI = −0.34,3.43],P = .11。结论本综述和荟萃分析的结果表明,与CD技术相比,使用OD技术放置的牙种植体在低骨密度区域具有更高的种植体稳定性和更高的骨密度。然而,需要更多的临床研究来验证这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Evidence-Based Dental Practice
Journal of Evidence-Based Dental Practice DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
105
审稿时长
28 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Evidence-Based Dental Practice presents timely original articles, as well as reviews of articles on the results and outcomes of clinical procedures and treatment. The Journal advocates the use or rejection of a procedure based on solid, clinical evidence found in literature. The Journal''s dynamic operating principles are explicitness in process and objectives, publication of the highest-quality reviews and original articles, and an emphasis on objectivity.
期刊最新文献
THE EFFICACY OF TECHNIQUES FOR MANAGING FRACTURED DENTAL IMPLANT ABUTMENT SCREWS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS MAKING CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR DENTISTRY MORE PATIENT-CENTERED THROUGH PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOME INTEGRATION Leveraging real-world data in evidence-based caries research: a meta-epidemiological study THE REPORTING QUALITY OF DENTAL PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES IN ORTHODONTIC TRIALS: A METHODOLOGICAL STUDY ALVEOLAR RIDGE PRESERVATION AT MOLAR EXTRACTION SITES MAY LESSEN RIDGE CHANGES AND AUGMENTATION NEEDS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1