Evaluation of implant site preparation with piezosurgery versus conventional drills in terms of operation time, implant stability and bone density (randomized controlled clinical trial- split mouth design).

BACKGROUND: The preparation of the implant bed has a major influence on the success rate and long-term survival of dental implants. Piezoelectric devices and special implant drilling inserts are now emerging to replace conventional drills showing improved bone response and healing around implants. The purpose of this study is to compare the piezoelectric inserts versus the traditional drills for implant site preparation. METHODS: Twelve male patients who received a total of twenty-four dental implants have been selected to participate in this split-mouth clinical trial. Each patient received two implants; one installed after piezosurgery assisted osteotomy, while the contralateral side received the implant with the original drilling protocol. The timing of surgery, implant stability, and bone density around the installed dental implants have been evaluated during a follow-up period extended to 4 months. RESULTS: a significant difference in terms of time of surgery (p < 0.005) and in implant stability at 4 months (p = 0.024) on the study side, while a non-statistical significance in terms of bone density was detected (p = 0.468). CONCLUSION: The piezoelectric implant site drilling protocol seemed to be a reliable and repeatable technique. Despite the limited sample size and lengthier operative time, the piezoelectric inserts enhanced bone quality and implant stability. Clinical trial registration Current Controlled Trials (ClinicalTrials.gov) https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05512273 ; the date of registration: 23/08/2022. Retrospectively registered.

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

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.