Characteristics of the implant surface may benefit osseointegration, and the knowledge of this process in diverse clinical situations may play a role in implant dentistry practice.Purpose:
The aim of the present study was to compare the stability of dental implants with different types of surface treatment.Materials and Methods:
Fifty-five implants were placed in the mandibles of 11 fully edentulous patients. Group 1 (G1) consisted of 27 implants with a hydrophilic surface. Group 2 (G2) consisted of 28 implants (double sandblasting and acid etching). Implants were distributed randomly; equal surfaces were not placed contiguously. Measurements were taken after surgery (baseline) and 10, 30, 60, and 90 days, 4 and 8 months after surgery. Resonance frequency analysis (RFA) was used for determining the stability.Results:
No statistically significant differences were found. The largest difference in implant stability quotient (ISQ) between groups occurred at the first evaluation (ISQ ≈ 69.8 in G1 and ≈ 68.4 in G2). Reductions in stability were more accentuated in the first month, returning to values similar to baseline in the subsequent months, with peak stability reached at 8 months (ISQ ≈ 69.8 in G1 and ≈ 69.8 in G2).Conclusion:
No statistically significant differences were found in the stability of the implants placed in edentulous mandibular arch, submitted to immediate loading analyzed using RFA.