Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: doi:10.22028/D291-46961
Title: In vitro evaluation of different implant systems and their influence on primary stability
Author(s): Neto, Osmar de Agostinho
Câmara, João Victor Frazão
Schestakow, Anton
Ribeiro, Amanda de Oliveira Pinto
Araujo, Tamara Teodoro
Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles
Language: English
Title: Scientific Reports
Volume: 16
Issue: 1
Publisher/Platform: Springer Nature
Year of Publication: 2026
Free key words: Dental implant
Torque controller
Milling
Oral implantology
DDC notations: 610 Medicine and health
Publikation type: Journal Article
Abstract: The aim of this in-vitro study was to compare the primary stability and bone quality changes of three milling systems for implants. Osteotomies were performed on fresh, low-density bovine ribs using three different milling techniques for the Strong SW implant system: conventional drilling according to the manufacturer’s protocol (control), osseodensification, and bone expander (n=5 per group). Prior to implant insertion, bone quality at the cervical, body, and apical regions was assessed using micro-computed tomography. Implants were then placed at the bone level, and primary stability was evaluated by measuring insertion torque with a digital torque meter. Bone quality and insertion torque values were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison test (p=0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the cervical, body, and apical regions, as well as among the implant groups SIN, VERSAH, and MAXIMUS (p<0.05). Furthermore, the insertion torque of the SIN group (35±21.5 N/cm), VERSAH group (43.2±27.1 N/cm), and MAXIMUS group (59.6±28.5 N/cm) also showed no statistically significant differences (p<0.05). These findings suggest a similarity in bone microarchitecture and insertion strength among the different implants studied. The three milling techniques demonstrated comparable performance, showing no significant differences in bone microarchitecture or primary stability. These results indicate that all systems provided similar conditions for implant insertion in low-density bone.
DOI of the first publication: 10.1038/s41598-026-35112-5
URL of the first publication: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-35112-5
Link to this record: urn:nbn:de:bsz:291--ds-469616
hdl:20.500.11880/41118
http://dx.doi.org/10.22028/D291-46961
ISSN: 2045-2322
Date of registration: 12-Feb-2026
Description of the related object: Supplementary Information
Related object: https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41598-026-35112-5/MediaObjects/41598_2026_35112_MOESM1_ESM.docx
https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41598-026-35112-5/MediaObjects/41598_2026_35112_MOESM2_ESM.docx
Faculty: M - Medizinische Fakultät
Department: M - Zahn-, Mund- und Kieferheilkunde
Professorship: M - Prof. Dr. Matthias Hannig
Collections:SciDok - Der Wissenschaftsserver der Universität des Saarlandes

Files for this record:
File Description SizeFormat 
s41598-026-35112-5.pdf1,2 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons