ArticleScientific reports2025
Heat reduction during bone drilling using a two-stage drilling strategy.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Thermal damage during bone drilling remains a significant concern in orthopaedic and dental surgeries. Excessive heat generation at the bone-drill interface can result in thermal necrosis and compromise implant stability. While several strategies have been proposed to mitigate intraoperative thermal injury, however, quantitative evaluations of staged drilling techniques remain limited. This study investigates the efficacy of a two-stage drilling strategy in reducing heat generation during cortical bone drilling. The approach involves creating an initial (pre-drilled) hole, followed by final enlargement to the target diameter (pilot hole). A validated three-dimensional dynamic elastoplastic finite element (FE) model was developed to simulate the bone drilling process and compare the bone temperature of conventional single-stage versus two-stage drilling techniques. Thermal analyses were conducted incorporating variations in the pre-to-pilot hole diameter ratio, feed force, and drill rotational speed. Simulation results indicated that a diameter ratio of 0.78 reduced peak bone temperatures by up to 12 °C compared to single-stage drilling. Further reductions in thermal accumulation were observed with increased feed forces of 40 N and 60 N. Increasing drill rotational speed from 800 to 2000 rpm decreased peak cortical bone temperatures from 57 °C to 43 °C. These findings demonstrate that the two-stage drilling strategy may mitigate thermal bone damage. The two-stage approach provides a practical solution to enhance thermal safety during implant site preparation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.