Biomechanical comparison of a novel engine‐driven ridge spreader and conventional ridge splitting techniques. Issue 6 (24th May 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Jung, Gyu‐Un; Kim, Jun Hwan; Lim, Nam Hun; Yoon, Gil Ho; Han, Ji‐Young
• Is Part Of: Clinical oral implants research. Volume 28:Issue 6(2017)
• Page Start: 689
• Page End: 696
• Publication Date: 2016-05-24
• Subjects: alveolar bone loss -- alveolar ridge augmentation -- bone grafting -- dental implants; Dental implants -- Research -- Periodicals; 617.69
• DOI: 10.1111/clr.12864
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0905-7161

Abstract

Abstract: Objectives: Ridge splitting techniques are used for horizontal ridge augmentation in implant dentistry. Recently, a novel engine‐driven ridge splitting technique was introduced. This study compared the mechanical forces produced by conventional and engine‐driven ridge splitting techniques in porcine mandibles. Material and methods: In 33 pigs, mandibular premolar areas were selected for the ridge splitting procedures, designed as a randomized split‐mouth study. The conventional group underwent a chisel‐and‐mallet procedure (control group, n = 20), and percussive impulse (Newton second, Ns) was measured using a sensor attached to the mallet. In the engine‐driven ridge spreader group (test group, n = 23), a load cell was used to measure torque values (Newton centimeter, Ncm). Horizontal acceleration generated during procedures (control group, n = 10 and test group, n = 10) was compared between the groups. Results: After ridge splitting, the alveolar crest width was significantly increased both in the control (1.23 ± 0.45 mm) and test (0.98 ± 0.41 mm) groups with no significant differences between the groups. The average impulse of the control group was 4.74 ± 1.05 Ns. Torque generated by rotation in the test group was 9.07 ± 2.15 Ncm. Horizontal acceleration was significantly less in the test group (0.82 ± 1.05 g ) than the control group (64.07 ± 42.62 g ) ( P < 0.001). Conclusions: Narrow edentulous ridges can be expanded by novel engine‐driven ridge spreaders. Within the limits of this study, the results suggested that an engine‐driven ridge splitting technique may be less traumatic and less invasive than a conventional ridge splitting technique.