Kemik densifikasyon ve kemik kondenzasyon yöntemleri ile yerleştirilen dental implantların stabilitelerinin değerlendirilmesi
Yükleniyor...
Dosyalar
Tarih
2021
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Hatay Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Giriş ve Amaç: Dental implant tedavisinin başarısı, implant ve kemik arasında "osseointegrasyon" denilen sıkı bir bağlantının oluşmasına bağlıdır. İmplant stabilitesi, osseointegrasyonun klinik göstergesi olarak kabul edilmektedir. Güncel implant uygulamalarında, implantlar geleneksel yöntem, kemik densifikasyon ve kemik kondenzasyon gibi çeşitli yöntemlerle yerleştirilmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, üç farklı yöntemle yerleştirilen implantların tedavi sürecinde stabilite değerlerinin kıyaslanmasıdır. Başlangıç hipotezimiz kemik densifikasyon ve kemik kondenzasyon yöntemlerinin implant satbilitesine pozitif etkileri olacağı yönündedir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu çalışma 30 hastaya (15 kadın 15 erkek) uygulanan 60 adet implant ile yapıldı. Çalışmaya katılan hastalar, randomize bir şekilde 10 hasta içeren 3 gruba ayrıldı. İlk grupta geleneksel yöntem ile densifikasyon yöntemi, ikinci grupta geleneksel yöntem ile kondenzasyon yöntemi, üçüncu grupta ise densifikasyon yöntemi ile kondenzasyon yöntemi arasındaki stabilite değerleri kıyaslandı. Operasyon günü, 4. hafta, 8. hafta ve 12. hafta sonunda ISQ değerleri ölçülerek kaydedildi. Üç ve üzeri gruplara göre normal dağılmayan verilerin karşılaştırılmasında Kruskal Wallis testi kullanıldı. İkili gruplara göre normal dağılmayan verilerin karşılaştırılmasında Mann-Whitney U testi ve normal dağılan verilerin karşılaştırılmasında Bağımsız iki önek t testi kullanıldı. Gruplar içi zamana göre ISQ değişimlerin incelenmesinde normal dağılmayan veriler için Friedman testi ve normal dağılan verilerin için Tekrarlı varyans analizi kullanıldı. nem düzeyi p<0,05 olarak alındı. Bulgular: Yapılan istatistiksel değerlendirmeler doğrultusunda, kemik densifikasyon ve kemik kondenzasyon yöntemlerinın stabilite değerleri arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark olmadığı (p>0,05), her iki yöntemle yerleştirilen implantların stabilite değerlerinin geleneksel yöntemle kıyaslandığında daha yüksek olduğu (p<0,05) görüldü. Sonuç: Bu çalışmanın sonucunda implant yerleştirme yönteminin stabilite değerleri üzerine etkili olduğu; kemik densifikasyon ve kemik kondenzasyon yöntemlerinin geleneksel yönteme göre, implant stabilitesi üzerinde pozitif bir etkisi olduğu (p<0,05), görüldü. Uygun cerrahi uygulamanın implantların başarısı üzerine etkili olduğu gözlendi.
Introduction and Purpose: The success of dental implant treatment depends on the formation of a tight connection between the implant and the bone, called "osseointegration". Implant stability is accepted as a clinical indicator of osseointegration. In current implant applications, implants are placed by various methods such as traditional method, bone densification and bone condensation. The aim of this study is to compare the stability values of implants placed with three different methods during the treatment process. The null hypothesis is that bone densification and bone condensation methods will have positive effects on implant stability. Material and Method: This study was performed with 60 implants applied to 30 patients (15 females and 15 males). The patients included in the study were randomly divided into 3 groups of 10 patients. In the first group, the traditional method and the condensation method, in the second group the traditional method and the condensation method, in the third group the stability values between the densification method and condensation methods were compared. ISQ values were measured and recorded at the end of the operation day, 4th week, 8th week and 12th week. The Kruskal Wallis test was used to compare data that were not normally distributed according to groups of three or more. Mann-Whitney U test was used for comparing non-normally distributed data according to paired groups, and two independent prefix t tests were used for comparison of normally distributed data. Friedman test was used for non-normally distributed data and repeated variance analysis was used for normally distributed data to examine ISQ changes according to time within groups. The significance level was taken as p <0.05. Result: In line with the statistical evaluations, that there was no statistically significant difference between the stability values of the bone densification and bone condensation methods (p> 0.05); and the stability values of the implants placed with both methods were higher compared to the traditional method (p <0.05) was observed. Conclusion: According to the results of this study, it is found that the implant placement method has an effect on the stability values; It was observed that bone densification and bone condensation methods had a positive effect (p <0.05) on implant stability compared to the traditional method. It was observed that proper surgical application had an effect on the success of implants.
Introduction and Purpose: The success of dental implant treatment depends on the formation of a tight connection between the implant and the bone, called "osseointegration". Implant stability is accepted as a clinical indicator of osseointegration. In current implant applications, implants are placed by various methods such as traditional method, bone densification and bone condensation. The aim of this study is to compare the stability values of implants placed with three different methods during the treatment process. The null hypothesis is that bone densification and bone condensation methods will have positive effects on implant stability. Material and Method: This study was performed with 60 implants applied to 30 patients (15 females and 15 males). The patients included in the study were randomly divided into 3 groups of 10 patients. In the first group, the traditional method and the condensation method, in the second group the traditional method and the condensation method, in the third group the stability values between the densification method and condensation methods were compared. ISQ values were measured and recorded at the end of the operation day, 4th week, 8th week and 12th week. The Kruskal Wallis test was used to compare data that were not normally distributed according to groups of three or more. Mann-Whitney U test was used for comparing non-normally distributed data according to paired groups, and two independent prefix t tests were used for comparison of normally distributed data. Friedman test was used for non-normally distributed data and repeated variance analysis was used for normally distributed data to examine ISQ changes according to time within groups. The significance level was taken as p <0.05. Result: In line with the statistical evaluations, that there was no statistically significant difference between the stability values of the bone densification and bone condensation methods (p> 0.05); and the stability values of the implants placed with both methods were higher compared to the traditional method (p <0.05) was observed. Conclusion: According to the results of this study, it is found that the implant placement method has an effect on the stability values; It was observed that bone densification and bone condensation methods had a positive effect (p <0.05) on implant stability compared to the traditional method. It was observed that proper surgical application had an effect on the success of implants.
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Diş Hekimliği, Dentistry, Osseodensifikasyon, Osseokondenzasyon, Rezonans Frekans Analizi, Dental İmplant., Osseodensification, Osseocondensation, Resonance Frequency Analysis, Dental Implan
