Solo onlineDOI: 10.11607/prd.2755, PubMed ID (PMID): 27560682Pagine 82-87, Lingua: InglesePatel, Arpita / Gil, Luiz F. / Castellano, Arthur / Freitas, Gileade / Navarro, Daniel / Peredo, Ana P. / Tovar, Nick / Coelho, PauloThis study was designed to compare the combined effect of two different drilling techniques (conventional expansion and one-step) and four different implant geometries in a beagle dog model. The nondecalcified bone-implant samples underwent histologic/metric analysis at 2 and 6 weeks. Morphologic analysis showed similarities between different drilling technique groups and implant geometries. Histomorphometric parameters, bone-to-implant contact (BIC), and bone area fraction occupancy (BAFO) were analyzed, and no statistical difference between drilling groups and/or implant geometry was found. Time was the only variable that affected BIC and BAFO, suggesting that the two protocols are equally biocompatible and osseoconductive.
