Comparison of Piezosurgery and Conventional Rotary Instruments for Removal of Impacted Mandibular Third Molars: A Randomized Controlled Clinical and Radiographic Trial

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to test the effect of the surgical removal of impacted mandibular third molars using piezosurgery versus the conventional surgical technique on postoperative sequelae and bone healing. Material and Methods. This study was carried out as a randomized controlled clinical trial: split mouth design. Twenty patients with bilateral mandibular third molar mesioangular impaction class II position B indicated for surgical extraction were treated randomly using either the piezosurgery or the conventional bur technique on each site. Duration of the procedure, postoperative edema, trismus, pain, healing, and bone density and quantity were evaluated up to 6 months postoperatively. Results. Test and control sites were compared using paired t-test. There was statistical significance in reduction of pain and swelling in test sites, where the time of the procedure was statistically increased in test site. For bone quantity and quality, statistical difference was found where test site showed better results. Conclusion. Piezosurgery technique improves quality of patient's life in form of decrease of postoperative pain, trismus, and swelling. Furthermore, it enhances bone quality within the extraction socket and bone quantity along the distal aspect of the mandibular second molar.

Evaluation of Efficiency and Safety of Piezosurgery Versus Conventional Rotary Instruments in Lateral Maxillary Sinus Floor Elevation: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

“…Patients in study group experienced significantly lesser pain than the control group. This is in agreement with Piersanti et al (2014) 22 24 in which the authors compared the pain score between the piezosurgery and the conventional technique in removing mandibular third molars. Lastly, when assessing swelling between both groups, it was significantly more prominent in the control group than the study group.…”

Randomized clinical study comparing Piezoelectric Surgery with conventional rotatory osteotomy in mandibular third molars surgeries

“…There is a great deal of literature ( Arakji et al, 2016 , Badenoch-Jones et al, 2016 , Bartuli et al, 2013 ; Bhati et al, 2010; Bhati et al, 2017 ; Mantovani et al, 2013; Mistry et al, 2016 , Sortino et al, 2008 ) on the relationships between the postoperative complications following extraction of the lower third molars using piezoelectric surgery. However, little has been published ( Basheer et al, 2017 , Chang et al, 2015 , Goyal et al, 2012 , Piersanti et al, 2014 ) regarding patient perceptions on postoperative quality of life.…”

“…Piezoelectric surgery is a pioneering technique that has an added advantage over burs and micro saws. The ultrasonic vibrations break down irrigation liquid into very small particles that are washed out from the operating field therefore, allowing for clear, unobstructed vision ( Arakji et al, 2016 ). Its mechanism of action is based on the ability of certain ceramics and crystals to deform when an electric current is passed across them, resulting in a microvibration amplitude between 60 and 200 mm/s at a modulated ultrasonic frequency of 24–29 kHz resulting in a clean, precise osteotomy ( Vercellotti, 2004 ).…”

Split crest technique for implant treatment of agenesis of the upper lateral incisors: results of a randomized pilot histological and clinical study at 24-month follow-up

“…Statistical comparison of histomorphometric data in group 1 (n = 9 bone cores) and group 2 (n = 7 bone cores), 2 months after surgery. consequently patient discomfort 30,31 with the use of piezoelectric instruments. In the present study, a piezoelectric scalpel was used for the bone incisions due to its ease, safety, and precision in cutting hard tissues with a minor damage and moreover, because it could be handled in order to obtain curved cuts, which could help to shape the bone contour in esthetic areas.…”