Clinical Evaluation of Conventional versus Osseodensification Drilling in Implant Placement

Clinical Evaluation of Conventional vs. Osseodensification Drilling in Implant Placement’ aims to compare the clinical outcomes of two implant drilling techniques—conventional drilling and osseodensification. The study focuses on assessing which method provides better implant stability and bone preservation during dental implant placement. Conventional drilling removes bone to create the implant site, which can reduce bone density and compromise implant stability, particularly in areas with low bone quality. In contrast, osseodensification is a newer technique that uses specially designed burs to preserve and compact the bone during osteotomy, potentially improving both primary stability and long-term outcomes. The objectives of the study are to compare soft tissue parameters such as implant probing depth, healing index, plaque index, and bleeding index, as well as hard tissue parameters like marginal bone levels, both clinically and radiographically. The study will include adult patients who require dental implants and meet the inclusion criteria of good general and oral health. Patients with conditions affecting bone metabolism, smokers, pregnant women, and those with poor oral hygiene or a history of radiation therapy will be excluded from the study. A randomized clinical trial design will be used, with participants divided into two groups—one receiving implants via conventional drilling and the other via osseodensification. Clinical and radiographic evaluations will be post-operatively using tools such as CBCT and RVG.