INFLUENCE OF DIFFERENT BONE GRAFTING TECHNIQUES ON PRIMARY STABILITY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56238/levv16n52-075Keywords:
(MeSH/DeCS), Bone Grafting, Primary Stability, Dental Implants, Osseodensification, BiomaterialsAbstract
Objective: To critically review the available evidence on the influence of different bone grafting techniques and implant site preparation methods on the primary stability of dental implants. Methods: Narrative review based on randomized clinical trials, prospective and retrospective studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses published between 2015 and 2025 in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and SciELO. Included studies evaluated autogenous bone grafts, substitute biomaterials, osseodensification, piezosurgery, and short implants, focusing on insertion torque, implant stability quotient (ISQ), and implant survival rates. Results: Autogenous grafts remain the gold standard due to their biological properties, but with significant donor site morbidity. Substitute biomaterials demonstrated comparable results in stability and survival, particularly in sinus floor elevation. Osseodensification showed improvements in torque and ISQ in type III–IV bone, although recent studies highlight controversies and protocol dependence. Short implants achieved survival rates similar to longer implants with bone augmentation, reducing morbidity and costs. Biological adjuncts such as PRF and platelet concentrates demonstrated coadjuvant benefits but do not replace conventional biomaterials.Conclusion: Primary stability is influenced by multiple variables, and technique selection should be individualized. Current evidence suggests that substitute biomaterials, osseodensification, and short implants are predictable alternatives to autogenous grafts in specific scenarios. This review emphasizes the need for individualized and integrated approaches to optimize clinical predictability in modern implant dentistry.
Downloads
References
ABAYOV, P. et al. Short dental implants versus longer implants with bone augmentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicina (Kaunas), v. 60, n. 5, p. 812, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60050812.
AGHALOO, T.; MOY, P. Autogenous bone grafts: grafting techniques and biology. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics of North America, v. 19, n. 1, p. 1-8, 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coms.2006.11.006.
ALFARAJ, T. M. A. et al. Platelet-rich fibrin used alone as a grafting material for maxillary sinus floor augmentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Biomedicines, v. 13, n. 2, p. 268, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines13020268.
ALTHOBAITI, A. K. et al. Osseodensification versus conventional drilling techniques for implant stability: a systematic review. Journal of Oral Implantology, v. 49, n. 2, p. 85-94, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-D-22-00168.
BABICH, O. et al. Platelet-rich fibrin as an adjunct in maxillary sinus augmentation: a systematic review. Medicina (Kaunas), v. 60, n. 2, p. 267, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60020267.
CARMAGNOLA, D. et al. Maxillary sinus floor augmentation with and without grafting materials: a randomized clinical trial with histological and clinical outcomes. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, v. 26, n. 1, p. 45-56, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.13325.
DEL FABBRO, M. et al. Efficacy of different grafting materials for maxillary sinus floor augmentation: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Clinical Oral Implants Research, v. 36, n. 1, p. 15-28, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.14201.
ESPOSITO, M. et al. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: augmentation procedures of the maxillary sinus. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, n. 3, CD008397, 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008397.pub2.
GÓMEZ-POLO, M. et al. Does length, diameter, or bone quality affect primary and secondary stability in self-tapping dental implants? A clinical study in 91 patients. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, v. 74, n. 7, p. 1344-1353, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2016.01.027.
HUANG, H. et al. Significance of implant stability quotient for implant clinical success: a systematic review. Journal of Dental Sciences, v. 15, n. 3, p. 219-229, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2020.02.005.
HUWAIS, S.; MEYER, E. A novel osseodensification implant site preparation technique to increase primary stability, bone mineral density, and bone-to-implant contact. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, v. 32, n. 1, p. 27-36, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.4817.
JENSEN, O. T.; TERHEYDEN, H. Bone augmentation procedures in localized defects in the alveolar ridge: clinical results with different techniques. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, v. 24, p. 218-236, 2009. PMID: 19492650.
MEREDITH, N. Assessment of implant stability as a prognostic determinant. International Journal of Prosthodontics, v. 11, n. 5, p. 491-501, 1998. PMID: 9922737.
PEREIRA, J. F. et al. Osseodensification: an alternative to conventional osteotomy technique for dental implants – systematic review. Journal of Clinical Medicine, v. 12, n. 22, p. 7046, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12227046.
POLITI, I. et al. Primary stability of implants placed with osseodensification versus conventional drilling: a clinical study. Clinical and Experimental Dental Research, v. 11, n. 1, p. 35-44, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.942.
SÁENZ-RAVELLO, G. et al. Short dental implants as an alternative to bone augmentation: a review of recent evidence. Medicina (Kaunas), v. 59, n. 11, p. 2015, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59112015.
SENNERBY, L.; MEREDITH, N. Implant stability measurements using resonance frequency analysis: biological and biomechanical aspects and clinical implications. Periodontology 2000, v. 67, n. 1, p. 36-49, 2015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12082.
SHANMUGAM, M. et al. Conventional versus osseodensification drilling in the posterior maxilla: a randomized clinical trial. International Journal of Implant Dentistry, v. 9, n. 1, p. 1-9, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-023-00534-y.
STACCHI, C. et al. Changes in implant stability using osseodensification drills versus piezoelectric surgery: a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, v. 25, n. 2, p. 145-156, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.13285.
VELASCO-ORTEGA, E. et al. Long-term clinical outcomes of implants placed after maxillary sinus floor augmentation: a 10-year follow-up. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, v. 18, n. 21, p. 11245, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph182111245.
ZHAO, Z. et al. Platelet concentrates in maxillary sinus floor augmentation: a meta-analysis. Journal of Stomatology, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, v. 126, n. 1, p. 100-107, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jormas.2024.09.005.
