ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: In this study, the diameter of each implant driver was measured and compared to find out the compatibility of implant drivers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Drivers from 12 implant systems being used in Dankook University Dental Hospital were included in this study. The shapes of the implant drivers were segregated, and the effective length and the diameter of upper, middle, lower part of driver tips were measured (n=10). The measured data were mathematically analyzed for its compatibility. RESULTS: A driver with the smallest diameter (1.17 mm) had the highest compatibility at the upper part of driver tip. This driver could be used for a bigger driver up to 1.35 mm in diameter. There were several driver groups which had the same diameter so as to be interchangeable each other. In the middle part, the smallest diameter measured was 1.2 mm and this was able to replace a driver up to 1.40 mm diameter. Since the diameter generally became thicker from upper part (the tip of driver) to the lower part (the shank of driver), some drivers with bigger diameter at the upper part so which was failed to show any compatibility became compatible with a driver which had smaller diameter at the upper part but wider in the middle part. The compatibility of torx shape drivers were affected by the inner diameter of the drivers not only by the outer diameter. Furthermore, the inner diameter of torx drivers decided the compatibility between torx and hex drivers. CONCLUSION: From the study it was found that compatibility in drivers existed among certain implant systems and to check its compatibility the diameter at a certain effective length should be measured. However, there has been not enough studies about long-term use of compatible drivers, so effects of using compatible drivers on drivers and implants are unknown. Therefore, usage in inevitable cases only is recommended and further study is needed.
ABSTRACT
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Implant drivers are getting popular in clinical dentistry. Unlike to implant systems with external hex connection, implant drivers directly engage the implant/abutment interface. The deformation of the implant/abutment interface can be introduced while placing an implant with its implant driver in clinical situations. PURPOSE: This study evaluated the change of rotational freedom between an implant and its abutment after application of different insertion torques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Three kinds of internal connection implants were utilized for the current study (4.5 x 12 mm Xive, 4.3 x 11.5 mm Inplant Magicgrip, 4.3 x 12 mm Implantium MF). An EstheticBase, a 2-piece top, a Dual abutment was used for its corresponding implant system. The rotational freedom between an implant and its abutment were measured before and after applying 45, 100 Ncm insertion torque. Repeated measures ANOVA was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Under 45 Ncm insertion torque, the rotational freedom between an implant and its abutment was significantly increased in Xive (P = .003). However, no significant change was noted in Inplant Magicgrip and Implantium MF. Under 100 Ncm torque, both in Xive (P = .0005) and Implatium MF (P = .03) resulted in significantly increased rotational freedom between the implant and its abutment. DISCUSSION: The design of the implant/implant driver interface effectively prevented the deformation of implant/abutment interface. Little change was noted in the rotational freedom between an implant and its abutment, even though the insertion torque was far beyond clinical application. CONCLUSIONS: The implant/abutment joint of internally connecting implants were quite stable under insertion torque in clinical situation.