English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Dental implants are considered stable tools for replacing missing teeth, achieving long-term success rates above 90 percent, and their use in dental practice has become normal. One of the reasons to this success is the primary reliability of an implant. Implant design is one of the main factors that play a role in stability. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the role of the Macro thread design and the Micro thread design on implant stability through the use of the Resonance Frequency Analysis (RFA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was carried out on 6 patients, each of these patients has missing teeth on each side of posterior area in the lower jaw. All the right sides received Micro thread design implant (dentium implant,) and the left side received Macro thread design implant (Megagen AnyRidge). After dental implants were placed in their sites, the stability was measured by using the Resonance Frequency Analysis (RFA) to assess the stability of the two types of implants at three times periods: At the time of placing the implant, 3 months and 6 months. RESULTS: The mean implant Stability value for Group A was 70.57±5.74 immediately post-operatively, on the 3 month to 77.14±6.74 and reach 84.29±6.02 on the 6 month, for Group B was 63.29±6.58 immediately post-operatively, on the 3 month 70.57 ± 4.69 and on the 6 month 77.14±4.53. The mean bone density values for Group A at 3 months was 481.98± 51.78 and at 6th month was 504.28± 47.50, in Group B the 3 months was 439.54±70.49 and at 6th month was 463.83± 74.44. CONCLUSION: The Micro thread design implants shows higher stability than Macro thread design.

MACRO VERSUS MICRO THREAD DESIGN IMPLANT AND THEIR EFFECT ON THE STABILITY