Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39851324›Full record

ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Comparison of One-Drill Protocol to Sequential Drilling In Vitro and In Vivo.

Sihana Rugova, Marcus Abboud

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sihana RugovaDepartment of Oral Biology and Pathology, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA.
Marcus AbboudSchool of Engineering, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5965-5448

Funding

This research received NIH funding, award 74009, active from December 2015 to February 2017. 74009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study compares the heat generated during bone drilling using different protocols and implant systems, first in vitro and then in vivo with an animal model. In the experimental phase, thermal data were collected using an infrared camera while preparing implant beds in bone similes. The heat generated by a one-drill protocol with a new-generation drill bit and the Straumann BLT sequential drilling protocol was evaluated. The experimental study was then replicated in an animal model to assess the impact of these protocols on early osseointegration, measured by bone-to-implant contact (BIC) at three weeks post-surgery for Straumann BLT SLActive and Medentika Quattrocone implants. The results showed the BLT sequential protocol generated significantly more heat during drilling in bone similes compared to the new-generation drill bit. In the animal model, a histological analysis revealed a trend favoring shorter drilling protocols, with reduced drilling times and a potential advantage for osseointegration, though the BIC differences were not statistically significant. These findings suggest that minimizing the number of drilling steps and thermal stress may enhance osseointegration more effectively than advanced implant surface treatments. This aligns with emerging views on the importance of optimized drilling protocols and designs to reduce heat generation and better preserve surrounding bone structure.

Indexed as

BLTbone-to-implant contactdental implantdrilling protocolsheat generationimplant bed preparationimplant drillsosseointegrationosteotomySLActivestraumannsurgical drill bitsthermal trauma

Identifiers

PMID39851324
PMCPMC11762762

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.