Piezosurgery or Conventional Rotatory Instruments for Inferior Third Molar Extractions?

Piersanti, Luigi; Dilorenzo, Matteo; Monaco, Giuseppe; Marchetti, Claudio

doi:10.1016/j.joms.2014.04.032

Cited by 58 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This should have been performed and reported in the papers. Among the studies included in this systematic review, eight (8) contemplated the variable pain [14,15,[23][24][25][26][27][28]. Although the meta-analysis was not recommended due to the high heterogeneity among the study results, five (5) of them had results favoring the use of piezoelectric motor, when the pain was evaluated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The differences between the evaluation periods and how to measure the edema between studies was crucial not to perform the statistical analysis. A total of seven (7) studies evaluated the edema [14,15,23,[27][28][29][30]. Of these, seven showed better results for the use of the piezoelectric motor in the lower third molar surgery, than rotary instruments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among the studies that evaluated postoperative pain compared to the use of piezoelectric motor and the use of osteotomy with rotary instruments, four (4) had results favoring the use of piezoelectric motor [14,15,23,24]. The other four (4) studies showed no statistically significant differences between the methods evaluated [25,28].…”

Section: Painmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the seven (7) studies that evaluated the edema, six (6) showed favorable results for the use of the piezoelectric motor for the removal of third molars, because they have less swelling after surgery at different measurement times of 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 days postoperative [14,15,23,[28][29][30]. In one study, there was no statistical difference between the piezoelectric motor and the rotary instruments [27].…”

Section: Edemamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Rotary Instrument or Piezoelectric for the Removal of Third Molars: a Meta-Analysis

Magesty

Galvão

Martins

et al. 2016

J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare, in the lower third molar surgery, the osteotomy techniques with rotary instruments and piezoelectric motors. Methods An electronic search was conducted using the following databases: Pubmed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register. Inclusion criteria were: studies in humans, randomized or nonrandomized, comparing the extraction of third molars that required osteotomy and/or odontosection with rotary instrument and osteotomy and/or odontosection with piezoelectric motor assistance. The analysis and inclusion of articles was performed by two reviewers independently. An evaluation of the quality of articles and data extraction was carried out. Results From a total of nine hundred seventy four (974) trials, eleven articles were included in the qualitative analysis, and seven were included in the quantitative analysis. Rotary instruments were faster than the piezoelectric surgery (95 % CI 0.34 to 1.16). The piezoelectric surgery showed better results when compared with roatry instruments when trismus was assessed in 2 (95 % CI 0.65 to 1.69), 3 (95 % CI 0.63 to 1.67) and 5 (95 % CI 0.03 to 2.26) days after surgery. Seven days after surgery, there were no differences between the techniques (95 % CI (-0.022) to (-1.49)). Conclusion The piezoelectric surgery was effective in reducing pain, swelling and trismus in third molar surgery, but the same requires greater surgical time than the rotary instruments.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Painmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Edemamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Rotary Instrument or Piezoelectric for the Removal of Third Molars: a Meta-Analysis

Magesty

Galvão

Martins

et al. 2016

J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As técnicas de osteotomia foram realizadas no mesmo paciente, como estudo-piloto, para que não houvesse, pelo mesmo motivo, discrepância dos resultados, já que alguns autores trazem pesquisas feitas em dois grupos de pacientes para a comparação do piezoelétrico com a osteotomia convencional [8][9] . Em exodontia de terceiros molares impactados, a limitação da abertura de boca, pode ser causada por edema no pós-operatório, sendo uma causa extra-articular, relacionada a diversos fatores, como a dificuldade do procedimento cirúrgico, o que envolve a severidade da retensão e a técnica utilizada, consequentemente, pelo tempo durante o transoperatório [10][11] .…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Fibrina rica em plaquetas e piezocirúrgico em comparação com instrumento rotatório convencional e coágulo em cirurgia de terceiros molares inferiores impactados: relato de caso

Fabris¹,

Silveira²,

Oliveira

et al. 2017

Rev. da Fac. de Odontologia, UPF

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

O presente estudo teve como objetivo avaliar os resultados pós-operatórios em cirurgias de terceiros molares inferiores impactados com um desenho split mouth. Em um dos lados foi utilizado fibrina rica em plaquetas (PRF) e piezocirúrgico enquanto que no lado oposto foi realizado osteotomia rotatória convencional e coágulo. Foram avaliados a relação entre as duas técnicas de osteotomia, tempo cirúrgico, gravidade das sequelas no pós-operatório incluindo dor, edema, trismo e reparo. Este trabalho foi executado através de um relato de caso clínico como projeto piloto, de uma série de casos clínicos. Os terceiros molares inferiores indicados para extração, foram pareados pela classificação de Pell e Gregory, sendo divididos em dois grupos: Grupo A (hemiarco direito) utilizado o piezocirúrgico e PRF; Grupo B (hemiarco esquerdo) seguindo os padrões tradicionais com brocas rotatórias e coágulo. As exodontias foram realizadas em um único momento pelo mesmo cirurgião-dentista. O piezocirúrgico comparado a técnica convencional demonstrou uma menor dor pós-operatória pela escala de VAS, além de diminuir o número de analgésicos tomados e reduzir significativamente o trismo após 72 horas da cirurgia. Em contrapartida, o tempo cirúrgico foi superior a técnica convencional. Conclui-se com o estudo, que o uso do piezocirúrgico e PRF, obteve melhores resultados nas condições pós-operatórias com relação a dor, edema e reparo. Porém, o tempo cirúrgico foi maior que a osteotomia convencional e coágulo. Sendo assim o presente estudo mostra que a piezocirurgia e a utilização combinada de PRF tem efeitos positivos nos resultados pós-operatórios, após a exodontia de terceiro molar impactado.

show abstract

Surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth

Bailey

Kashbour

Shah

et al. 2020

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Piezosurgery or Conventional Rotatory Instruments for Inferior Third Molar Extractions?

Cited by 58 publications

References 21 publications

Rotary Instrument or Piezoelectric for the Removal of Third Molars: a Meta-Analysis

Rotary Instrument or Piezoelectric for the Removal of Third Molars: a Meta-Analysis

Fibrina rica em plaquetas e piezocirúrgico em comparação com instrumento rotatório convencional e coágulo em cirurgia de terceiros molares inferiores impactados: relato de caso

Surgical techniques for the removal of mandibular wisdom teeth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About