TODENTJ-25-03-2019_TODENTJ-12-46 1553507268 Bentham Open doi@benthamopen.net Bentham Open The Open Dentistry Journal TODENTJ 1874-2106 01 31 2018 12 1 Amir Reza Rokn Akram Labibzadeh Amir Alireza Rasouli Ghohroudi Ahmad Reza Shamshiri Somaye Solhjoo Introduction: A correct diagnosis and optimal treatment planning is essential for success in implant dentistry. Proper diagnosis of bone quality is an important part of the diagnostic procedure. Objective: The purpose of this study was to correlate the tactile sense of the surgeon in the assessment of bone density to the histomorphometric analysis of bone quality. Methods: In this study, 56 bone samples from 33 patients were harvested from implant sites with trephine drills. The samples were analyzed with Image J software. In the samples following parameters were measured: BV/TV, superficial cortical plate thickness, the number and thickness of haversian canals in cortical bone and the number, thickness and distance of trabecules in cancellous bone. The clinical hardness of bone during drilling was evaluated by surgeon according to Misch. GEE analysis with exchangeable correlation structure and linear model was used to evaluate the relationship between the tactile sense of the surgeon and histomorphometric parameters and all analysis was adjusted for two confounding variables: gender and location. Results: There were 51.79% implants in D2 samples and 48.21% in D3. Bone classification according to Misch was significantly correlated to distance of trabecules in cancellous bone (P-value=0.05), and shown marginally significant correlation with mean superficial cortical bone thickness (P-value =0.07) and number of haversian canals (P-value =0.005) in cortical bone. Discussion: There were differences between our results and others. The authors believed that these differences mainly are because of confounding factors, that in this study were eliminated. The clinical finding during surgery can approximately explain the histologic properties of bone. Conclusion: It is concluded that tactile sense of the surgeon can exhibit the histologic properties of the bone, and we are able to estimate the healing prognosis of the bone in implant placement. 01 31 2018 46 52 TODENTJ-12-46 1 10.2174/crossmark_policy opendentistryjournal.com benthamopen.com true Peer Reviewed Single blind Checked with iThenticate 2017-6-6 2017-07-25 2017-12-26 2018-01-31 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode 10.2174/1874210601812010046 1553507268 https://opendentistryjournal.com/VOLUME/12/PAGE/46/ https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-46/TODENTJ-12-46.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-46/TODENTJ-12-46.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-46/TODENTJ-12-46.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-46/TODENTJ-12-46.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-46/TODENTJ-12-46.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-46/TODENTJ-12-46.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-46/TODENTJ-12-46.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-46/TODENTJ-12-46.xml Implant Dent. Rokn A. 23 697 2014 Rokn A, Rasouli G. AA, Daneshmonfared M, Menasheof R, Shamshiri AR. Tactile sense of the surgeon in determining bone density when placing dental implant. Implant Dent 2014; 23 (6) : 697-703. J. Oral Rehabil. Fuh L.J. 37 346 2010 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02061.x Fuh LJ, Huang HL, Chen CS, et al. Variations in bone density at dental implant sites in different regions of the jawbone. J Oral Rehabil 2010; 37 (5) : 346-51. J. Periodontol. Jaffin R.A. 62 2 1991 10.1902/jop.1991.62.1.2 Jaffin RA, Berman CL. The excessive loss of Branemark fixtures in type IV bone: A 5-year analysis. J Periodontol 1991; 62 (1) : 2-4. Clin. Implant Dent. Relat. Res. Linck G.K. 18 601 2016 10.1111/cid.12341 Linck GK, Ferreira GM, De Oliveira RC, Lindh C, Leles CR, Ribeiro-Rotta RF. The influence of tactile perception on classification of bone tissue at dental implant insertion. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2016; 18 (3) : 601-8. Clin. Oral Implants Res. Pereira A.C. 24 414 2013 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02338.x Pereira AC, Souza PP, Souza JA, Silva TA, Batista AC, Ribeiro-Rotta RF. Histomorphometrical and molecular evaluation of endosseous dental implants sites in humans: Correlation with clinical and radiographic aspects. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013; 24 (4) : 414-21. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants Shapurian T. 21 290 2006 Shapurian T, Damoulis PD, Reiser GM, Griffin TJ, Rand WM. Quantitative evaluation of bone density using the Hounsfield index. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006; 21 (2) : 290-7. J. Craniofac. Surg. Trisi P. 24 841 2013 10.1097/SCS.0b013e31827c9e01 Trisi P, Berardi D, Paolantonio M, Spoto G, D’Addona A, Perfetti G. Primary stability, insertion torque, and bone density of conical implants with internal hexagon: Is there a relationship? J Craniofac Surg 2013; 24 (3) : 841-4. Clin. Oral Implants Res. Marquezan M. 23 767 2012 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02228.x Marquezan M, Osório A, Sant’Anna E, Souza MM, Maia L. Does bone mineral density influence the primary stability of dental implants? A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012; 23 (7) : 767-74. Clin. Oral Implants Res. Merheb J. 21 612 2010 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01880.x Merheb J, Van Assche N, Coucke W, Jacobs R, Naert I, Quirynen M. Relationship between cortical bone thickness or computerized tomography-derived bone density values and implant stability. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21 (6) : 612-7. Int. J. Oral Implantol. Misch C.E. 5 7 1988 Misch CE. Editorial comments: The National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference statement on dental implants. Int J Oral Implantol 1988; 5 (1) : 7-10. Int. J. Oral Implantol. Misch C.E. 7 9 1990 Misch CE. Divisions of available bone in implant dentistry. Int J Oral Implantol 1990; 7 (1) : 9-17. Clin. Oral Implants Res. Nkenke E. 14 601 2003 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2003.00937.x Nkenke E, Hahn M, Weinzierl K, Radespiel-Tröger M, Neukam FW, Engelke K. Implant stability and histomorphometry: A correlation study in human cadavers using stepped cylinder implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003; 14 (5) : 601-9. J. Oral Rehabil. Turkyilmaz I. 33 881 2006 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2006.01692.x Turkyilmaz I, Tözüm TF, Tumer C, Ozbek EN. Assessment of correlation between computerized tomography values of the bone, and maximum torque and resonance frequency values at dental implant placement. J Oral Rehabil 2006; 33 (12) : 881-8. J. Clin. Periodontol. Turkyilmaz I. 34 716 2007 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2007.01112.x Turkyilmaz I, Tumer C, Ozbek EN, Tözüm TF. Relations between the bone density values from computerized tomography, and implant stability parameters: A clinical study of 230 regular platform implants. J Clin Periodontol 2007; 34 (8) : 716-22. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants Herrmann I. 20 220 2005 Herrmann I, Lekholm U, Holm S, Kultje C. Evaluation of patient and implant characteristics as potential prognostic factors for oral implant failures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005; 20 (2) : 220-30. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants Jemt T. 10 303 1995 Jemt T, Lekholm U. Implant treatment in edentulous maxillae: A 5-year follow-up report on patients with different degrees of jaw resorption. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995; 10 (3) : 303-11. J. Clin. Periodontol. Alsaadi G. 34 359 2007 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2007.01047.x Alsaadi G, Quirynen M, Michiels K, Jacobs R, van Steenberghe D. A biomechanical assessment of the relation between the oral implant stability at insertion and subjective bone quality assessment. J Clin Periodontol 2007; 34 (4) : 359-66. Clin. Oral Implants Res. Trisi P. 10 1 1999 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1999.100101.x Trisi P, Rao W. Bone classification: Clinical-histomorphometric comparison. Clin Oral Implants Res 1999; 10 (1) : 1-7. J. Oral Implantol. Misch C.E. 25 185 1999 10.1563/1548-1336(1999)025<0185:ABQISF>2.3.CO;2 Misch CE, Dietsh-Misch F, Hoar J, Beck G, Hazen R, Misch CM. A bone quality-based implant system: First year of prosthetic loading. J Oral Implantol 1999; 25 (3) : 185-97. J. Periodontol. Becker W. 71 625 2000 10.1902/jop.2000.71.4.625 Becker W, Hujoel PP, Becker BE, Willingham H. Osteoporosis and implant failure: An exploratory case-control study. J Periodontol 2000; 71 (4) : 625-31. Clin. Oral Implants Res. Norton M.R. 12 79 2001 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.012001079.x Norton MR, Gamble C. Bone classification: An objective scale of bone density using the computerized tomography scan. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001; 12 (1) : 79-84. Dentomaxillofac. Radiol. Lindh C. 25 146 1996 10.1259/dmfr.25.3.9084263 Lindh C, Nilsson M, Klinge B, Petersson A. Quantitative computed tomography of trabecular bone in the mandible. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1996; 25 (3) : 146-50. Clin. Oral Implants Res. Fanuscu M.I. 15 213 2004 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.00969.x Fanuscu MI, Chang TL. Three-dimensional morphometric analysis of human cadaver bone: Microstructural data from maxilla and mandible. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004; 15 (2) : 213-8. Clin. Oral Implants Res. Rozé J. 20 1140 2009 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01745.x Rozé J, Babu S, Saffarzadeh A, Gayet-Delacroix M, Hoornaert A, Layrolle P. Correlating implant stability to bone structure. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009; 20 (10) : 1140-5. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants Aranyarachkul P. 20 416 2005 Aranyarachkul P, Caruso J, Gantes B, et al. Bone density assessments of dental implant sites: 2. Quantitative cone-beam computerized tomography. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005; 20 (3) : 416-24. Dentomaxillofac. Radiol. Taguchi A. 26 85 1997 10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600209 Taguchi A, Tanimoto K, Akagawa Y, Suei Y, Wada T, Rohlin M. Trabecular bone pattern of the mandible. Comparison of panoramic radiography with computed tomography. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1997; 26 (2) : 85-9. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants Lee S. 22 208 2007 Lee S, Gantes B, Riggs M, Crigger M. Bone density assessments of dental implant sites: 3. Bone quality evaluation during osteotomy and implant placement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007; 22 (2) : 208-12. Clin. Oral Implants Res. Molly L. 17 124 2006 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01356.x Molly L. Bone density and primary stability in implant therapy. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006; 17 (Suppl. 2) : 124-35. J. Prosthet. Dent. Lekholm U. 79 43 1998 10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70192-1 Lekholm U. Surgical considerations and possible shortcomings of host sites. J Prosthet Dent 1998; 79 (1) : 43-8. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants Ribeiro-Rotta R.F. 22 289 2007 Ribeiro-Rotta RF, Lindh C, Rohlin M. Efficacy of clinical methods to assess jawbone tissue prior to and during endosseous dental implant placement: A systematic literature review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007; 22 (2) : 289-300. Clin. Oral Implants Res. Klinge B. 6 91 1995 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1995.060204.x Klinge B, Johansson C, Albrektsson T, Hallström H, Engdahl T. A new method to obtain bone biopsies at implant sites peri-operatively: technique and bone structure. Clin Oral Implants Res 1995; 6 (2) : 91-5. Implant Dent. Aksoy U. 18 316 2009 10.1097/ID.0b013e31819ecc12 Aksoy U, Eratalay K, Tözüm TF. The possible association among bone density values, resonance frequency measurements, tactile sense, and histomorphometric evaluations of dental implant osteotomy sites: A preliminary study. Implant Dent 2009; 18 (4) : 316-25. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants Sennerby L. 7 62 1992 Sennerby L, Thomsen P, Ericson LE. A morphometric and biomechanic comparison of titanium implants inserted in rabbit cortical and cancellous bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992; 7 (1) : 62-71.