113 Int. J. Odontostomat., 11(1):113-117, 2017. Study of the Relationships between Bur Diameter and Dental Implant Diameter Estudio de las Relaciones entre Diámetro de Fresas y Diámetro de Implantes Dentales Ricardo Cardozo 1 ; Sergio Olate 2,3 ; Pablo Navarro 2 ; Javier Araya 1 ; Omar González 1 ; Juan Carrasco 1 & Claudia Zenteno 1 CARDOZO, R.; OLATE, S.; NAVARRO, P.; ARAYA, J.; GONZALEZ, O.; CARRASCO, J. & ZENTENO, C. Study of the relationships netween bur diameter and dental implant diameter. Int. J. Odontostomat., 11(1):113-117, 2017. ABSTRACT: The bur used to construct the bed where a dental implant is installed is extremely important to treatment success. The aim of this investigation was to analyze the relationship between bur diameter and implant diameter in different areas. A descriptive study was designed to analyze 5 commercial brands currently on the market. The manufacturer’s instructions were followed to establish the size and type of bur indicated for the study implants, which were regular, with a width between 3.5 mm and 4.0 mm and a length from 12 mm to 13 mm. Drilling from the most apical region, the first measurement of width was established 3 mm cervically, the lower middle measurement 6 mm cervically, the upper middle measurement at 9 mm and the cervical measurement at 12 mm. A scanning electron microscope was used standardized for all measurements; the data were analyzed using the Shapiro-Wilk test and the t-test, having considering a value of p<0.05 for significant differences. At apical level, all the implants were wider than the bur. The greatest differences between bur width and implant were observed at cervical level, maintaining a relation where the implant was always wider. In medium- sized areas, it was observed that in some systems the burs have a larger diameter than the study implants. A significant relation was established in the apical, upper middle and cervical areas. Bur morphology is related to implant morphology; no implant system is the same as another in terms of the implant-bur relation. KEY WORDS: Dental implant, bur, primary stability INTRODUCTION Osseointegration has been defined as the intimate contact between bone tissue and implanted biomaterial, which involves the biological and mechanical considerations necessary for success (Or- tega-Lopes et al., 2012). The value given to each va- riable depends on different surgical and prosthetic conditions as well as intersubject variations, demonstrating the variability and versatility needed for current implant systems. The heightened stability and success of dental implants (De Moraes et al., 2015), over 90 % in almost every case, reflects the progress made in all the processes involved. Albrektsson et al . (1998) suggested 6 key factors that determine the success of osseointegration: biocompatibility, implant design, surface type, state of the receptor bed, surgical technique and load conditions. The installation conditions of dental implants are essential among these criteria, such that drilling protocols must be constantly assessed. The drilling and resulting implant installation impact directly on the primary stability of the implant (Campos et al., 2012; Coelho et al., 2011) and thus the bone response that it is going to present; the bone quality of the receptor bed also influences this parameter (Olate et al., 2011). When there are important differences between the prepared bone bed and the installed implant, this creates spaces that are quickly are filled with the blood 1 Unidad de Rehabilitación Oral, Facultad de Odontología, Universidad San Sebastián, Chile. 2 Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco, Chile. 3 Center for Biomedical Research, Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Chile.