Abstract
AbstractEstablishing a standard measurement for drilling and screwing bone implants in different amounts and qualities of bone tissue, in a simple and adequate way to control and predict results, is the gold standard for successful primary stability and better results on long-term osseointegration. So far, the maximum insertion torque (MIT) has been used as the main parameter to achieve success in primary stability and osseointegration, although it has shown conflicting results in the literature for over four decades when predicting standard or minimum values. Basically, the surgeon's experience guides the planning and execution of the surgical procedure, adapted in each case according to his tactile experience, guided by X-ray analysis and the bone and general conditions of the patient. In this work, using a new biomechanical simple machine as a dental implant, a new method will be described mathematically and experimentally, which standardizes the compression and torque in the implant-bone contact, in five different bone densities, during the achievement of mechanical primary stability. The results described the relationship between the MIT, maximum removal torque, and maximum force of static friction between implant-bone and bone-to-bone, achieving a controlled and predictable standard steady-state torque that maintains equilibrium in elastic stress for the primary stability of bone implants, hereby established for an innovative simple machine Bioactive Kinetic Screw.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Mechanical Engineering,General Engineering,Aerospace Engineering,Automotive Engineering,Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering,Applied Mathematics
Reference43 articles.
1. Hansen EA, Smith G (2009) Factors affecting cadence choice during submaximal cycling and cadence influence on performance. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 4(1):3–17. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.4.1
2. Kandavalli SR, Wang Q, Ebrahimi M, Gode C, Djavanroodi F, Attarilar S, Liu S (2021) A Brief review on the evolution of metallic dental implants: history, design, and application. Front Mater 8:646383. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2021.646383
3. Lee D-H, Cho S-A, Lee C-H, Lee K-B (2015) The Overuse of the Implant Motor. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 17:435–441. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12195
4. Neugebauer J, Scheer M, Mischkowski RA et al (2009) Comparison of torque measurements and clinical handling of various surgical motors. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 24:469–476
5. Hanaor DAH, Gan Y, Einav I (2016) Static friction at fractal interfaces. Tribol Int 93:229–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2015.09.016