Influence of dental implant site preparation method on three aspects of the site: magnetodynamic mallet versus conventional drill

Aim: Magnetodynamic surgery has assumed increasing importance in recent years. The purpose of the present study was to compare in vitro, using dry porcine ribs, two methods of dental implant site preparation (conventional drill and magnetic mallet) on three aspects of the site. These were the difference between the diameter of the site and the diameter of the last drill used (an index of the accuracy of the preparation), the weight loss of the specimen on which the site was prepared (index of the bone loss in the site), and the change of temperature at the site (an index of the change to the material at the site). Methods: Eight preformed pork ribs were chosen for the study. Four implant preparations were made on each rib, two with Magnetic Mallet (Meta Ergonomica, Turbigo, Italy) and two with traditional drills. Each bone sample was weighed before and after implant site preparation in order to calculate the amount of bone lost during preparation. The diameter of preparations was analyzed with the aid of an optical microscope (MZ6, Leica, Wetzlar, Germany) connected to a dedicated measurement software. For the evaluation of the temperature, eight preparation sites were marked. In correspondence of each preparation site, on the opposite side of the rib, a hole was made for the thermocouple (HI 91530K, Hanna Instruments, Padova, Italy). During the preparations, the thermocouple was kept inserted inside the control hole to record the temperature variation. The results were analyzed using appropriate statistical methods, such as the Kolmogorov-Smirnoff test and the Wilcoxon test. Results: It was found that mallet drill provided significantly higher accuracy of preparation, lower amount of damage at the site, and less change to the porcine rib test material at the preparation site. Conclusions: A possible clinical implication of this finding is discussed.