DOI:

10.37988/1811-153X_2026_1_188

Performance characteristics of drills with different geometries for dental implantation in unfavorable anatomical conditions with a consistent drilling protocol with a minimum step of increasing the diameter of the drill

Downloads

Authors

  • O.O. Yanushevich 1, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Science in Medicine, Professor, Rector
    ORCID: 0000-0003-0059-4980
  • N.I. Krikheli 1, Doctor of Science in Medicine, full professor of the Clinical dentistry Department, vice-rector
    ORCID: 0000-0002-8035-0638
  • A.V. Isaev 2, PhD in Engineering, associate professor of the Department of Instrumentation and shaping technologies
    ORCID: 0000-0002-5479-4737
  • P.Yu. Peretyagin 2, PhD in Engineering, leading researcher of the Department of Highly efficient processing technologies
    ORCID: 0000-0001-9053-496X
  • O.V. Kramar 1, head of the Science office, assistant at the Clinical dentistry Department
    ORCID: 0000-0003-0325-587X
  • A.M. Panin 1, Doctor of Science in Medicine, full professor of the Oral surgery propaedeutics Department
    ORCID: 0000-0002-6087-7272
  • A.M. Tsitsiashvili 1, Doctor of Science in Medicine, professor of the Oral surgery propaedeutics Department
    ORCID: 0000-0002-4737-8508
  • D.A. Lezhnev 1, Doctor of Science in Medicine, full professor of the Radiology Department
    ORCID: 0000-0002-7163-2553
  • A.A. Ershov 2, senior lecturer of the Department of Instrumentation and shaping technologies
    ORCID: 0000-0003-3966-7032
  • M.N. Bychkova 1, PhD in Medical Sciences, associate professor of the Clinical dentistry Department
    ORCID: 0000-0002-2173-7779
  • M.A. Sukhov 1, postgraduate student of the Oral surgery propaedeutics Department
    ORCID: 0009-0001-4035-4490
  • 1 Russian University of Medicine, 127006, Moscow, Russia
  • 2 Moscow State University of Technology “STANKIN”, 127055, Moscow, Russia

Abstract

Four surgical osseodensification drills with different geometric parameters were designed and manufactured from martensitic stainless steel (equivalent to AISI 420) with a wear-resistant titanium nitride (TiN) coating applied by physical vapor deposition (PVD). For the experimental study, bone samples (blocks) were prepared from cattle ribs, corresponding to C. Misch’s D3—D4 bone type, which is commonly found in the distal jaws. The processed samples were divided into groups according to the previously assigned surgical drill number. After every 4th osteotomy, an optical assessment of the cutting edge wear was performed using a scanning electron microscope and the change in bone tissue temperature was determined using a K-type thermocouple. Our experimental study on cattle ribs confirms the complex influence of the osseodensification drill geometry on the heating of bone tissue and its density estimated by Hounsfield unit (HU) value during the preparation of a dental implant bed using a sequential drilling protocol with a minimal step of increasing the working diameter of the drill. Surgical drills made of AISI 420 steel with a TiN (PVD) coating showed no wear after 24 osteotomies, which is comparable to the reference Densah drills. Drill with the largest clearance and helix angles, provides the best thermal conditions during the osteodensification procedure. Drills with a clearance angle α =20° provided a 2—6 times higher densification increase than drills with an α=6°. Drills with α=20° increased bone density by 34—51%, while those with α=6° increased density by only 7—20%. Further studies to refine and validate the obtained models of functional relationships, including the use of experimental drills using other drilling protocols, seem relevant.

Key words:

surgical drill for osteodensification, dental implantation, dental implant bed, unfavorable anatomical conditions

For Citation

[1]
Yanushevich O.O., Krikheli N.I., Isaev A.V., Peretyagin P.Yu., Kramar O.V., Panin A.M., Tsitsiashvili A.M., Lezhnev D.A., Ershov A.A., Bychkova M.N., Sukhov M.A. Performance characteristics of drills with different geometries for dental implantation in unfavorable anatomical conditions with a consistent drilling protocol with a minimum step of increasing the diameter of the drill. Clinical Dentistry (Russia).  2026; 29 (1): 188—197. DOI: 10.37988/1811-153X_2026_1_188

References

  1. Dudin M.A., Chernovol E.M., Rubezhov A.L., Solovyeva A.M., Chernovol N.V., Kovalevsky S.V. Evaluation of implant survival and causes of early implant failure: a retrospective study. Parodontologiya. 2025; 1: 49—57 (In Russian). DOI: 10.33925/1683-3759-2025-991
  2. Astafyev A.A., Kopetsky I.S., Konovalov O.E., Shulaev A.V., Guseva O.Yu. Challenges in the organization and delivery of dental implantation and principles for its enhancement. The Bulletin of Contemporary Clinical Medicine. 2026; 19 (1): 133—140 (In Russian). DOI: 10.20969/VSKM.2026.19(1).133-140
  3. Hossain S.D., Shirokova D.G., Kobets K.R., Mukhametshin R.F., Trufanov V.D., Akramov M.L. Features of surgical implantation protocol depending on the implant surface roughness and bone density, in vitro. Medical alphabet. 2025; 1: 108—112 (In Russian). DOI: 10.33667/2078-5631-2025-1-108-112
  4. Kulakov A.A., Kasparov A.S., Porfenchuk D.A. Factors affecting osteointegration and the use of early functional load to reduce the duration of treatment in dental implantation. Stomatology. 2019; 4: 107—115 (In Russian). DOI: 10.17116/stomat201998041107
  5. French D., Ofec R., Levin L. Long term clinical performance of 10 871 dental implants with up to 22 years of follow-up: A cohort study in 4247 patients. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2021; 23 (3): 289—297. PMID: 33768695
  6. Magomedova M.H. Elimination of soft tissue deficiency of the alveolar ridge: master’s thesis. Makhachkala, 2024. 163 p. (In Russian).
  7. Polupan P.V., Sipkin A.M., Modina T.N. Osteoplasty in oral surgery: outcomes, complications, success factors, and risks classification. Clinical Dentistry (Russia). 2022; 1: 58—65 (In Russian). DOI: 10.37988/1811-153X_2022_1_58
  8. Urban I.A., Wessing B., Alández N., Meloni S., González-Martin O., Polizzi G., Sanz-Sanchez I., Montero E., Zechner W. A multicenter randomized controlled trial using a novel collagen membrane for guided bone regeneration at dehisced single implant sites: Outcome at prosthetic delivery and at 1-year follow-up. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019; 30 (6): 487—497. PMID: 30927498
  9. Alshamrani A.M., Mubarki M., Alsager A.S., Alsharif H.K., AlHumaidan S.A., Al-Omar A. Maxillary sinus lift procedures: An overview of current techniques, presurgical evaluation, and complications. Cureus. 2023; 15 (11): e49553. PMID: 38156177
  10. Skakunov Y.I., Drobyshev A.Y., Redko N.A., Le T.H. The use of an innovative technique for perforations of the mucous membrane of the maxillary sinus during the sinus lift operation. Medical alphabet. 2024; 11: 42—47 (In Russian). DOI: 10.33667/2078-5631-2024-11-42-47
  11. Kulakov A.A. Surgical Dentistry: National Guidelines. Moscow: GEOTAR-Media, 2021. Pp. 314—321 (In Russian).
  12. Pokhabov A.A., Lomakin M.V., Soloshchansky I.I., Botoeva A.K., Totrova M.R., Nabieva N.M. Comparative analysis of alveolar bone volume reconstruction outcomes using the guided bone regeneration technique. Parodontologiya. 2024; 3: 279—291 (In Russian). DOI: 10.33925/1683-3759-2024-996
  13. Tsitsiashvili A.M., Panin A.M., Volosova E.V. The success of treatment and survival of dental implants in different approaches to the treatment of patients using dental implants in conditions of limited bone volume. Russian Journal of Dentistry. 2020; 1: 32—38 (In Russian). DOI: 10.18821/1728-2802-2020-24-1-32-38
  14. Ortiz R., Maurício P., Mascarenhas P.S. Densifying the future: A critical review of osseodensification and implant dentistry. Dent J (Basel). 2025; 13 (10): 461. PMID: 41149108
  15. Padhye N.M., Padhye A.M., Bhatavadekar N.B. Osseodensification — A systematic review and qualitative analysis of published literature. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2020; 10 (1): 375—380. PMID: 31737477
  16. Poonia P.S., Patel I.B. Comparative evaluation of osseodensification vs conventional osteotomy technique for dental implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry. 2024; 1: 58—69. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1437
  17. Banerjee S., Dasgupta D., Parasrampuria N., Pal D., Gandhi U.V. Comparative evaluation of osseodensification drilling versus conventional drilling technique on dental implant stability: A systematic review. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2024; 24 (3): 225—232. PMID: 38946504
  18. Tao X., Yang J., Ma T., Chen M., An Q., Yu D. Optimizing osseodensification drilling for dental implant placement: An in vitro study. Clin Exp Dent Res. 2025; 11 (3): e70155. PMID: 40497493
  19. Vaddamanu S.K., Saini R.S., Vyas R., Kanji M.A., Alshadidi A.A.F., Hafedh S., Cicciù M., Minervini G. A comparative study on bone density before and after implant placement using osseodensification technique: a clinical evaluation. Int J Implant Dent. 2024; 10 (1): 56. PMID: 39560860
  20. Bleyan S., Gaspar J., Huwais S., Schwimer C., Mazor Z., Mendes J.J., Neiva R. Molar septum expansion with osseodensification for immediate implant placement, retrospective multicenter study with up-to-5-year follow-up, introducing a new molar socket classification. J Funct Biomater. 2021; 12 (4): 66. PMID: 34940545
  21. Koutouzis T., Huwais S., Hasan F., Trahan W., Waldrop T., Neiva R. Alveolar ridge expansion by osseodensification-mediated plastic deformation and compaction autografting: A multicenter retrospective study. Implant Dent. 2019; 28 (4): 349—355. PMID: 31274667
  22. Isaev A., Isaeva M., Yanushevich O., Krikheli N., Kramar O., Tsitsiashvili A., Grigoriev S., Sotova C., Peretyagin P. Concept and design of cutting tools for osseodensification in implant dentistry. Sci. 2024; 4: 79. DOI: 10.3390/sci6040079
  23. Yanushevich O.O., Krikheli N.I., Tsitsiashvili A.M., Peretyagin P.Yu., Bychkova M.N., Kramar O.V. Prospects for developing domestic instruments for dental implantation in various clinical conditions. Russian Stomatology. 2024; 4: 4—11 (In Russian). DOI: 10.17116/rosstomat2024170414
  24. Mikic M., Vlahovic Z., Stevanović M., Arsic Z., Mladenovic R. The importance of correlation between CBCT analysis of bone density and primary stability when choosing the design of dental implants — ex vivo study. Tomography. 2022; 8 (3): 1293—1306. PMID: 35645393
  25. Dolgalev A.A., Danaev A.B., Yusupov R.D., Hossain Sh. J., Gabrielyan R.G., Zolotaev K. E.Objective assessment of measurement error in significant cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice. Medical alphabet. 2022; 7: 65—68 (In Russian). DOI: 10.33667/2078-5631-2022-7-65-68

Downloads

Received

February 12, 2026

Accepted

March 15, 2026

Published on

March 31, 2026