Comparative Analysis of the Results the Benefits of Numerical Evaluation

Abstract

Comparative analysis of the results for two groups of 60 patients (reference group and Op. 1 group). The results of the secondary bone stock and secondary stability are indicated as a numerical mean what allows quantification of a difference. The role of each “impacting” factor: osteoporosis, deficient initial bone stock and the type of primary stability (length of the implant and proximal stabilization) in the preservation or regeneration of secondary bone stock and secondary stability is confirmed.

• Secondary bone stock: to explain the regression of −0.9 points of the value of the initial bone stock for the reference group and of −0.2 points for the Op. 1, the negative impact of a surgery on the bone vascularization, probably somewhat more aggressive in the beginning of the learning curve, cannot be excluded and also making a non-pediculated flap, which was the case in 35 % (21 patients) of the cases in the reference series.

• Secondary stability: to explain the deficient secondary stability (weighted score) in the Op. 1 group (−1.6 point) the absence of primary global or proximal stability favorable for osseointegration must be pointed out and also the primary stability in the diaphyseal region, less favorable for secondary stability, especially if, after making a flap, proximal stabilization is not achieved whenever possible