We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
International Journal of Oral Implantology



Forgotten password?


Dear readers,

our online journals are moving. The new (and old) issues of all journals can be found at
In most cases you can log in there directly with your e-mail address and your current password. Otherwise we ask you to register again. Thank you very much.

Your Quintessence Publishing House
Int J Oral Implantol (Berl) 13 (2020), No. 3     2. Sep. 2020
Int J Oral Implantol (Berl) 13 (2020), No. 3  (02.09.2020)

Page 241-252, PubMed:32879929

Bone modifications around porous trabecular implants inserted with or without primary stability 2 months after tooth extraction: A 3-year controlled trial
Bianconi, Stefano / Wang, Hom-Lay / Testori, Tiziano / Fontanella, Fabrizio / Del Fabbro, Massimo
Purpose: Implant primary stability has long been considered a prerequisite for successful osseointegration. However, achieving stability may be difficult when placing implants in wide postextractive bone defects. The purpose of this study was to conduct a clinical and radiographic investigation of bone modifications at porous-structured implants inserted with or without primary stability.
Materials and methods: Fifty porous-structured implants were inserted in the posterior sockets of 50 consecutive patients 2 months after tooth extraction, combined with allogeneic bone and a resorbable membrane. The implants were divided into two groups according to insertion torque: spinner (spinning at 35 Ncm, n = 23) and stable (stable at 35 Ncm, n = 27). Implant stability was assessed by resonance frequency analysis from baseline to 6-month function. Follow-up took place 3 years after implant placement.
Results: At baseline, the implant stability quotient was undetectable in the spinner group and averaged 75.07 ± 5.84 in the stable group. At uncovering, the implant stability quotient increased to 71.33 ± 4.42 and 77.97 ± 3.30 in the spinner and stable group, respectively (P < 0.001). After 6 months of loading, no between-group difference in implant stability quotient was found (P = 0.13). Marginal bone level changes were similar between groups at all follow-ups, averaging −0.41 ± 0.77 mm and −0.15 ± 0.53 mm at 36-month follow-up in the spinner and stable group, respectively (P = 0.35). No implant failed throughout the observation period. Neither biological nor mechanical complications occurred.
Conclusion: Implants with a moderately rough surface and a porous-structured body may osseointegrate even without primary stability.

Conflict-of-interest statement: Dr Bianconi, Prof Testori, Dr Fontanella and Prof Del Fabbro declare no conflicts of interest. Prof Wang received an honorarium to lecture at the Zimmer Biomet 3i NYU Symposium 2018.

Keywords: alveolar bone resorption, bone regeneration, dental implants, implant primary stability, osseoincorporation, osseointegration, osseous defects
fulltext (no access granted) Endnote-Export