ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2026
SEM Evaluation of Surface Wear on Drills from Selected Implant Systems-In Vitro Study.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the degree of surface wear in implant drills from four commercial systems subjected to standardized osteotomy cycles. MATERIALS: Four implant systems (Osstem, Megagen, Straumann, and Bego) were evaluated using sets of three drills of increasing diameters. A total of 120 osteotomies were performed in standardized porcine rib specimens under controlled drilling conditions (1200 rpm, continuous 4 °C saline irrigation, 32:1 reduction handpiece). After each drilling series, drills were cleaned, sterilized, and analyzed using SEM in three orientations. Wear was assessed using a seven-parameter scoring system. Multifactorial ANOVA, Pearson correlation, and hierarchical clustering were employed to evaluate the effects of drill brand, diameter, and wear patterns.
resultsBoth drill brand and diameter significantly influenced total wear scores (
conclusionsImplant drill wear is strongly dependent on drill diameter, and cutting geometry. Small-diameter drills are most susceptible to surface degradation, which may increase friction and thermal load during osteotomy. Systems with enhanced material properties or optimized geometries demonstrated superior wear resistance. These findings highlight the importance of monitoring drill condition, adhering to recommended reuse limits, and considering advanced drill coatings or materials to ensure safe and predictable implant site preparation. Further research incorporating real-time thermal measurements and extended drilling cycles is needed to establish evidence-based guidelines for drill longevity and clinical performance.
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.