Reduced somatosensory impairment by piezosurgery during orthognathic surgery of the mandible

Brockmeyer, Phillipp; Hahn, Wolfram; Fenge, S.; Moser, Norman; Schliephake, Henning; Gruber, Rudolf

doi:10.1007/s10006-015-0499-0

Cited by 20 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“… 74 There are many other indications for the use of the piezoelectric device in maxillofacial surgery. 75 An increasing number of studies show the use of the piezoelectric device in orthognathic surgery, 76 – 80 and even research on the use of computer-assisted piezoelectric surgery for osteotomies has been published. 81 The advantage of high-precision cutting and reduced risk of nerve damage are very convincing arguments to use the piezoelectric device.…”

Section: Clinical Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Piezosurgery in implant dentistry

Stübinger¹,

Stricker²,

Berg³

2015

CCIDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Piezosurgery, or the use of piezoelectric devices, is being applied increasingly in oral and maxillofacial surgery. The main advantages of this technique are precise and selective cuttings, the avoidance of thermal damage, and the preservation of soft-tissue structures. Through the application of piezoelectric surgery, implant-site preparation, bone grafting, sinus-floor elevation, edentulous ridge splitting or the lateralization of the inferior alveolar nerve are very technically feasible. This clinical overview gives a short summary of the current literature and outlines the advantages and disadvantages of piezoelectric bone surgery in implant dentistry. Overall, piezoelectric surgery is superior to other methods that utilize mechanical instruments. Handling of delicate or compromised hard- and soft-tissue conditions can be performed with less risk for the patient. With respect to current and future innovative surgical concepts, piezoelectric surgery offers a wide range of new possibilities to perform customized and minimally invasive osteotomies.

show abstract

Section: Clinical Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Piezosurgery in implant dentistry

Stübinger¹,

Stricker²,

Berg³

2015

CCIDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Geha et al reported an 80% complete neurosensory recuperation 2 months after BSSRO [17]. Brockmeyer et al also showed less somatosensory impairment and faster recovery of somatosensory function using piezosurgery [18].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Usefulness of Piezoelectric Surgery in Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Only two studies presented a methodological quality and risk analysis that was considered good; these two studies had a score of 5 36,37 . Of the 12 selected articles, two reported retrospective studies 38,39 , which impairs randomization and blinding.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the studies in which the two types of surgical instruments were compared, the results obtained were compared between different patients 10,12 , or the comparison was made in the same patient where one side of the SSO had been performed with a saw and the contralateral side with a piezoelectric device 9,36,37 . Two articles reported 34 cases of rotation of the occlusal plane (Table 2) 10,39 .…”

Section: Type Of Movement and Manufacturers Of The Instruments Usedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison between piezoelectric surgery and conventional saw in sagittal split osteotomies: a systematic review

Silva

Carvalho-Reis

Bonardi

et al. 2017

International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A systematic review of the advantages and disadvantages of piezoelectric surgery in comparison with conventional saws for sagittal split osteotomy (SSO) was performed. Relevant studies published in the last 10 years were identified through a search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Direct, and Embase databases and assessed against predetermined eligibility criteria. The initial search resulted in 1736 articles. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 12 articles remained. A total of 799 patients with an average age of 27.5 years underwent SSO performed using a saw or ultrasonic device. Results showed that it took longer to perform the osteotomies using an ultrasonic device than using a conventional saw. At ≥6 months of follow-up, neurosensory disturbance was seen in 4.7% of patients who underwent piezoelectric surgery versus 61.6% of patients who underwent surgery in which a conventional saw was used. It was found that the use of piezoelectric surgery in SSO leads to the best outcome regarding neurosensory disturbance when compared to conventional saws (P=0.04) at ≥6 months of follow-up. Further studies are required for the evaluation of the other clinical parameters assessed.

show abstract

Reduced somatosensory impairment by piezosurgery during orthognathic surgery of the mandible

Abstract: Piezosurgery caused reduced somatosensory impairment and a faster recovery of somatosensory functions in the present investigation.

Cited by 20 publications

References 21 publications

Piezosurgery in implant dentistry

Piezosurgery in implant dentistry

The Usefulness of Piezoelectric Surgery in Sagittal Split Ramus Osteotomy

Comparison between piezoelectric surgery and conventional saw in sagittal split osteotomies: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About