Top

BMC Oral Health

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Research

A randomized controlled trial comparing conventional and piezosurgery methods in mandibular bone block harvesting from the retromolar region

Authors: Ferit Bayram, Ahmet Demirci

Published in: BMC Oral Health | Issue 1/2023

Abstract

Background

Although piezosurgery is now commonly used for various applications in maxillofacial surgery, its advantages over conventional rotary instruments in terms of postoperative edema, ecchymosis, postoperative morbidity, and prolonged osteotomy time have been questioned.

Materials and methods

This study aimed to compare the efficiency, postoperative morbidity, and complication rates of piezosurgery and conventional methods in harvesting autogenous ramus grafts. In this randomized controlled trial, 21 patients (32 sides) underwent autogenous graft harvesting from the ramus area, with 16 sites treated using piezosurgery and 16 using the conventional method. The primary outcomes measured were osteotomy time, total operation time, and postoperative morbidity. Complication rates were also evaluated.

Results

The final analysis encompassed 19 patients, accounting for a total of 30 donor sites, following the exclusion of two patients who were unable to attend the scheduled follow-up visits. A total of 19 patients (30 donor sites) were included in the final analysis. No statistically significant difference was found in the mean osteotomy time between the piezosurgery group (mean: 10.35, SD: 2.74 min) and the conventional group (mean: 8.74, SD: 2.74 min) (95% CI: -3.67 to 0.442, p = 0.119). The total operation time, postoperative pain, and swelling were not significantly different between the two groups (p > 0.05). The complication rates, including wound dehiscence and inferior alveolar nerve exposure, were similar in both groups.

Conclusions

Piezosurgery can be safely used for harvesting autogenous ramus grafts and does not increase osteotomy or total operation time compared to the conventional method. The postoperative morbidity and complication rates were also similar, indicating that both techniques can be effectively employed in clinical practice.

Clinical Trial Registration

The protocol was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT05548049, First registration date: 21/09/2022).

Esposito M, Grusovin MG, Felice P, Karatzopoulos G, Worthington HV, Coulthard P. Interventions for replacing missing teeth: horizontal and vertical bone augmentation techniques for dental implant treatment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;2009(4):CD003607.PubMedPubMedCentral

Mordenfeld A, Hallman M, Johansson CB, Albrektsson T. Histological and histomorphometrical analyses of biopsies harvested 11 years after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with deproteinized bovine and autogenous bone. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010:no–no.

Chiapasco M, Zaniboni M, Rimondini L. Dental implants placed in grafted maxillary sinuses: a retrospective analysis of clinical outcome according to the initial clinical situation and a proposal of defect classification. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008;19(4):416–28.CrossRefPubMed

Chiapasco M, Casentini P, Zaniboni M. Bone augmentation procedures in implant dentistry. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24 Suppl:237 – 59.

Nkenke E, Stelzle F. Clinical outcomes of sinus floor augmentation for implant placement using autogenous bone or bone substitutes: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20:124–33.CrossRefPubMed

Sorni M, Guarinos J, Garcia O, Penarrocha M. Implant rehabilitation of the atrophic upper jaw: a review of the literature since 1999. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2005;10(Suppl 1):E45–56.PubMed

Hanser T, Doliveux R. MicroSaw and Piezosurgery in Harvesting Mandibular Bone blocks from the Retromolar Region: a Randomized Split-Mouth prospective clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018;33(2):365–72.CrossRefPubMed

Sohn DS, Ahn MR, Lee WH, Yeo DS, Lim SY. Piezoelectric osteotomy for intraoral harvesting of bone blocks. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2007;27(2):127–31.PubMed

Vercellotti T, De Paoli S, Nevins M. The piezoelectric bony window osteotomy and sinus membrane elevation: introduction of a new technique for simplification of the sinus augmentation procedure. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2001;21(6):561–7.PubMed

10.

Zhang YQ, Zhao YJ, Jiang JD, Cheng QT, Yang ZC, Lu MM. Assessment of immediate clotting after flapless extraction using piezosurgery or turbine handpiece in patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy. J Oral Sci. 2022;64(4):294–9.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Stacchi C, Troiano G, Montaruli G, Mozzati M, Lamazza L, Antonelli A, et al. Changes in implant stability using different site preparation techniques: osseodensification drills versus piezoelectric Surgery. A multi-center prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2023;25(1):133–40.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Badenoch-Jones EK, David M, Lincoln T. Piezoelectric compared with conventional rotary osteotomy for the prevention of postoperative sequelae and Complications after surgical extraction of mandibular third molars: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;54(10):1066–79.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Barone A, Santini S, Marconcini S, Giacomelli L, Gherlone E, Covani U. Osteotomy and membrane elevation during the maxillary sinus augmentation procedure. A comparative study: piezoelectric device vs. conventional rotative instruments. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008;19(5):511–5.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Kisel J, Khatib M, Cavale N. A comparison between Piezosurgery and Conventional osteotomies in Rhinoplasty on Post-operative Oedema and Ecchymosis: a systematic review. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2022.

15.

Mantovani E, Arduino PG, Schierano G, Ferrero L, Gallesio G, Mozzati M, et al. A split-mouth randomized clinical trial to evaluate the performance of piezosurgery compared with traditional technique in lower wisdom tooth removal. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014;72(10):1890–7.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Pereira RS, Pavelski MD, Griza GL, Boos F, Hochuli-Vieira E. Prospective evaluation of morbidity in patients who underwent autogenous bone-graft harvesting from the mandibular symphysis and retromolar regions. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019;21(4):753–7.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Misch CM. Use of the mandibular ramus as a donor site for onlay bone grafting. J Oral Implantol. 2000;26(1):42–9.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Lima TC, Bagordakis E, Falci SGM, Dos Santos CRR, Pinheiro MLP. Pre-emptive effect of Dexamethasone and Diclofenac Sodium Associated with Codeine on Pain, Swelling, and Trismus after third molar Surgery: a Split-Mouth, Randomized, Triple-Blind, Controlled Clinical Trial. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;76(1):60–6.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Neupert EA 3rd, Lee JW, Philput CB, Gordon JR. Evaluation of dexamethasone for reduction of postsurgical sequelae of third molar removal. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1992;50(11):1177–82. discussion 82 – 3.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Crosetti E, Battiston B, Succo G. Piezosurgery in head and neck oncological and reconstructive Surgery: personal experience on 127 cases. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2009;29(1):1–9.PubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Jiang Q, Qiu Y, Yang C, Yang J, Chen M, Zhang Z. Piezoelectric Versus Conventional Rotary techniques for impacted third molar extraction: a Meta-analysis of Randomized controlled trials. Med (Baltim). 2015;94(41):e1685.CrossRef

22.

Bassi F, Cicciu M, Di Lenarda R, Galindo Moreno P, Galli F, Herford AS et al. Piezoelectric bone surgery compared with conventional rotary instruments in oral surgery and implantology: Summary and consensus statements of the International Piezoelectric Surgery Academy Consensus Conference 2019. Int J Oral Implantol (Berl). 2020;13(3):235-9.

23.

Bertossi D, Nocini R, Luciano U, Galzignato PF, Ricciardi G, Lucchese A, et al. Piezoelectric Surgery inserts vs conventional burst: a clinical investigation. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2018;32(2 Suppl 2):15–9.PubMed

24.

Horton JE, Tarpley TM Jr., Jacoway JR. Clinical applications of ultrasonic instrumentation in the surgical removal of bone. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1981;51(3):236–42.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Lo Giudice R, Puleio F, Rizzo D, Alibrandi A, Lo Giudice G, Centofanti A et al. Comparative investigation of cutting devices on Bone blocks: an SEM morphological analysis. Appl Sci. 2019;9(2).

26.

Robiony M, Polini F, Costa F, Zerman N, Politi M. Ultrasonic bone cutting for surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion (SARME) under local anaesthesia. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;36(3):267–9.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Nehme W, Fares Y, Abou-Abbas L. Piezo-surgery technique and intramuscular dexamethasone injection to reduce postoperative pain after impacted mandibular third molar Surgery: a randomized clinical trial. BMC Oral Health. 2021;21(1):393.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Hartlev J, Norholt SE, Schou S, Isidor F. Pain after mandibular ramus block harvesting and lateral ridge augmentation with and without involvement of platelet-rich fibrin: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2021;50(3):384–90.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Martini M, Rohrig A, Reich RH, Messing-Junger M. Comparison between piezosurgery and conventional osteotomy in cranioplasty with fronto-orbital advancement. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017;45(3):395–400.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Louis PJ. Bone grafting the mandible. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2011;23(2):209–27.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Silva FM, Cortez AL, Moreira RW, Mazzonetto R. Complications of intraoral donor site for bone grafting prior to implant placement. Implant Dent. 2006;15(4):420–6.CrossRefPubMed

32.

McCormick R, Meechan J, Adams J, Stanncliffe H, Merecer L, Best K, et al. Is the degree of facial swelling after dental extraction sufficient to justify the current delays to radiotherapy mask production? A pilot evaluation of postextraction swelling using 3D photography. Clin Exp Dent Res. 2022;8(2):583–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: A randomized controlled trial comparing conventional and piezosurgery methods in mandibular bone block harvesting from the retromolar region
Authors: Ferit Bayram
Ahmet Demirci
Publication date: 01-12-2023
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: BMC Oral Health / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6831
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03739-9

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

A randomized controlled trial comparing conventional and piezosurgery methods in mandibular bone block harvesting from the retromolar region

Abstract

Background

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical Trial Registration

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical Trial Registration

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

Association of oral status with frailty among older adults in nursing homes: a cross-sectional study

Application of virtual reality in dental implants: a systematic review

Evaluation of dental pulp stem cells behavior after odontogenic differentiation induction by three different bioactive materials on two different scaffolds

The efficacy of concentrated growth factor and platelet-rich fibrin as scaffolds in regenerative endodontic treatment applied to immature permanent teeth: a retrospective study

Guided endodontics versus conventional access cavity preparation: an ex vivo comparative study of substance loss

Determinants of dental care use in patients with rare diseases: a qualitative exploration