Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 7, 2026

A Novel Surgical Technique in a Sheep Model for Suburethral Graft Implantation
Published on: June 20, 2025
The effect of osseodensification drilling for endosteal implants with different surface treatments: A study in sheep
Bradley Lahens1, Christopher D Lopez1, Rodrigo F Neiva2
1Department of Biomaterials and Biomimetics, New York University College of Dentistry, New York, New York, 10010.
Abstract:
This study investigated the effects of osseodensification drilling on the stability and osseointegration of machine-cut and acid-etched endosteal implants in low-density bone. Twelve sheep received six implants inserted into the ilium, bilaterally (n = 36 acid-etched, and n = 36 as-machined). Individual animals received three implants of each surface, placed via different surgical techniques: (1) subtractive regular-drilling (R): 2.0 mm pilot, 3.2 and 3.8 mm twist drills); (2) osseodensification clockwise-drilling (CW): Densah Bur (Versah, Jackson, MI) 2.0 mm pilot, 2.8, and 3.8 mm multifluted tapered burs; and (3) osseodensification counterclockwise-drilling (CCW) Densah Bur 2.0 mm pilot, 2.8 mm, and 3.8 mm multifluted tapered burs. Insertion torque was higher in the CCW and CW-drilling compared to the R-drilling (p < 0.001). Bone-to-implant contact (BIC) was significantly higher for CW (p = 0.024) and CCW-drilling (p = 0.006) compared to the R-drilling technique. For CCW-osseodensification-drilling, no statistical difference between the acid-etched and machine-cut implants at both time points was observed for BIC and BAFO (bone-area-fraction-occupancy). Resorbed bone and bone forming precursors, preosteoblasts, were observed at 3-weeks. At 12-weeks, new bone formation was observed in all groups extending to the trabecular region. In low-density bone, endosteal implants inserted via osseodensification-drilling presented higher stability and no osseointegration impairments compared to subtractive regular-drilling technique, regardless of evaluation time or implant surface. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater 107B: 615-623, 2019.
More Related Videos
03:10Pilot In Vitro Study to Assess Cleaning Ability and Effects of Different Decontamination Methods on Implant Surfaces
Published on: November 21, 2025
06:36Effects of Mechanical Methods Used in Peri-implantitis Treatment on Implant Surface Decontamination and Roughness
Published on: March 14, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Cloning of Dolly the Sheep
Surface Tension and Surface Energy
Consider a beaker filled with liquid. The bulk molecules in the liquid experience equal attractive forces on all sides with the surrounding molecules. However, the surface molecules experience a net attractive force downward due to the bulk molecules. The surface of the liquid behaves like a stretched membrane,...
Wood Surfacing
The equipment used in the surfacing process is a plane equipped with rotating blades. This tool efficiently smoothens the wood surface and can...
Cell-surface Signaling
Area of a Surface of Revolution
Equipotential Surfaces and Conductors