The Stability and Survival Rate of Dental Implants After Preparation of the Site by Piezosurgery vs Conventional Drilling: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Li, Xiaoni; Xiao, Lin; Guo, Ji-lai; Wang, Yaozhong

doi:10.11607/jomi.5913

Cited by 13 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many studies have pointed out that, after conventional drilling preparation, implant stability tends to decrease significantly for the first 3 weeks after implant placement 31–35 . In the present study, stability of implants inserted after PISP decreased for 14 days after placement (mean ISQ 66.5 ± 6.7–4.9% decrease from mean primary stability), in perfect accordance with previous clinical trials 12,25 and meta‐analyses 36,37 . Stability of implants inserted after OD decreased for 21 days after placement (mean ISQ 65.9 ± 7.8—7.6% decrease from mean primary stability), in accordance with a recent clinical study showing that the use of OD for implant site preparation does not prevent implant stability decrease during the first 3 weeks of healing 38 .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…[31][32][33][34][35] In the present study, stability of implants inserted after PISP decreased for 14 days after placement (mean ISQ 66.5 ± 6.7-4.9% decrease from mean primary stability), in perfect accordance with previous clinical trials 12,25 and meta-analyses. 36,37 Stability of implants inserted after OD decreased for 21 days after placement (mean ISQ 65.9 ± 7.8-7.6% decrease from mean primary stability), in accordance with a recent clinical study showing that the use of OD for implant site preparation does not prevent implant stability decrease during the first 3 weeks of healing. 38 However, it should be underlined that ISQ value reductions recorded in the present study (both in test and control group) were very limited, without reaching statistical significance when compared to primary stability.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…In analyses reporting similar survival rates for implants inserted with different implant site preparation techniques. 16,36,39,40 It must be underlined that the findings of this multi-center randomized clinical trial should be interpreted with caution due to some limitations of the present study. Factors including the limited numerosity of the sample, the selection of a specific surgical site (only lateral maxilla) and the use of a single implant type should be taken into consideration when generalizing the present results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Changes in implant stability using different site preparation techniques: Osseodensification drills versus piezoelectric surgery. A multi‐center prospective randomized controlled clinical trial

Stacchi

Troiano

Montaruli

et al. 2022

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Implant stability is influenced by bone density, implant design, and site preparation characteristics. Piezoelectric implant site preparation (PISP) has been demonstrated to improve secondary stability compared with conventional drilling techniques. Osseodensification drills (OD) have been recently introduced to enhance both bone density and implant secondary stability. The objective of the present multi‐center prospective randomized controlled trial was to monitor implant stability changes over the first 90 days of healing after implant bed preparation with OD or PISP. Methods Each patient received two identical, adjacent or contralateral implants in the posterior maxilla. Following randomization, test sites were prepared with OD and control sites with PISP. Resonance frequency analysis was performed immediately after implant placement and after 7, 14, 21, 28, 60, and 90 days. Implants were then restored with single screw‐retained metal‐ceramic crowns and followed for 12 months after loading. Results Twenty‐seven patients (15 males and 12 females; mean age 63.0 ± 11.8 years) were included in final analysis. Each patient received two identical implants in the posterior maxilla (total = 54 implants). After 1 year of loading, 53 implants were satisfactorily in function (one failure in test group 28 days after placement). Mean peak insertion torque (40.7 ± 12.3 Ncm and 39.5 ± 10.2 Ncm in test and control group, respectively) and mean implant stability quotient (ISQ) value at baseline (71.3 ± 6.9 and 69.3 ± 7.6 in test and control group, respectively) showed no significant differences between the two groups. After an initial slight stability decrease, a shift to increasing ISQ values occurred after 14 days in control group and after 21 days in test group, but with no significant differences in ISQ values between the two groups during the first 90 days of healing. Conclusion No significant differences in either primary or secondary stability or implant survival rate after 1 year of loading were demonstrated between implants inserted into sites prepared with OD and PISP.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Changes in implant stability using different site preparation techniques: Osseodensification drills versus piezoelectric surgery. A multi‐center prospective randomized controlled clinical trial

Stacchi

Troiano

Montaruli

et al. 2022

Clin Implant Dent Rel Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Among these, osteotomy, the surgical procedure for implant bed preparation in which the fixture is inserted, represents a factor that must be increasingly considered when planning implant-prosthetic rehabilitation. Over time, several osteotomy techniques and protocols were suggested and well described in the literature for surgical implant site preparation, and currently, there is a clear dichotomy between ablative techniques (drills and piezoelectric tips) [ 5 , 6 ] and expansive techniques (osteotomes) [ 7 , 8 , 9 ]. On the one hand, there is surgical preparation involving bone removal, and on the other, there is bone fragment compaction on the implant socket walls.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybrid Funnel Technique: A Novel Approach for Implant Site Preparation: A Pilot Study

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(1) Background: Different techniques and tools have been developed for implant site preparation. In this clinical scenario, Hybrid Funnel Technique (HFT), a novel osteotomy procedure, has been proposed. (2) Aim: The aim of this retrospective observational study was to consider the different responses to compression of the histological bony compartments (cancellus and cortical). HFT involves the use of multiple drills for the cortical layer preparation and of an osteotome for the osteocompaction of the cancellous bone. (3) Materials and Methods: Following computer-supported implant planning and guided surgery, 10 osteotomies with HFT were performed and 10 implants with the same length and diameter were placed in seven healthy and no daily smoking patients. Periapical X-ray and intraoral photographs were performed at baseline and after 12 months of follow-up to evaluate marginal bone level (MBL) changes and aesthetic results obtained from implant prosthetic rehabilitation. (4) Results: At 1 year of follow-up, 100% of the implants were successfully integrated, MBL change mean value was 0.17 mm ± 0.21. No differences in terms of MBL were noted between thin and thick biotypes. Pink esthetic score (PES) and white esthetic score (WES), assessed one year after definitive restoration placement, were 7.5 ± 2.3 and 8.5 ± 1.1, respectively. (5) Conclusions: Based on the findings of this preliminary clinical study, HFT has led to stability of peri-implant tissues and could represent a reliable technique for surgical preparation of the implant site.

show abstract

“…Similar results were reported in mandibular cyst enucleation. 3 Also, these two techniques were compared in crest preparation before implant application 5 , inferior alveolar nerve and transposition 6 , osteotomy and maxillary sinus augmentation procedure 7 , and alveolar distraction 8 in the literature. It is described that the use of ultrasonic devices as piezosurgery for osteotomies has several advantages, including less surgical injury, cutting selectively, postoperative pain, and neurological complications 9,10 in these studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Histopathological assessment of healing process using an amniotic membrane in osteotomy defects caused by piezosurgery and conventional surgery in rats

Ilker¹,

Ilker

Sivrikaya

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a paucity of studies aimed to compare the healing process of piezosurgery with conventional surgery. This study evaluated the histopathological assessment of healing process in osteotomy defects caused by these surgical methods in rats using an amniotic membrane (hAM). In this randomized controlled experimental study, there were 2 main groups: group 1 (Piezosurgery method-right tibia) and group 2 (Conventional surgery method-left tibia) and subgroups determined by the sacrification periods on the 7th (n = 20) and 21st days (n = 20). hAM was used in all groups. The primary outcome variable was new bone formation, while inflammation, necrosis, fibrotic tissue formation in the defective zone were secondary outcomes. 40 male Sprague Dawley rats were used. The 7th day fibrosis levels and the 7th new bone-building level of the group who underwent piezosurgery were found to be significantly higher than those of the group undergoing conventional surgery (p < 0.05) and the 21st new bone-building level was significantly lower than conventional surgery. In all rats, on the 21st day, there were statistically significant decreases in inflammation, fibrosis, and increases in the healing score (p < 0.05). Also, there was no statistically difference in new bone formation between 7st and 21st days (p > 0.05). The choice of conventional surgery when applying with hAM increases the new bone building in the late period.

show abstract

The Stability and Survival Rate of Dental Implants After Preparation of the Site by Piezosurgery vs Conventional Drilling: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cited by 13 publications

References 4 publications

Changes in implant stability using different site preparation techniques: Osseodensification drills versus piezoelectric surgery. A multi‐center prospective randomized controlled clinical trial

Changes in implant stability using different site preparation techniques: Osseodensification drills versus piezoelectric surgery. A multi‐center prospective randomized controlled clinical trial

Hybrid Funnel Technique: A Novel Approach for Implant Site Preparation: A Pilot Study

Histopathological assessment of healing process using an amniotic membrane in osteotomy defects caused by piezosurgery and conventional surgery in rats

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About