MicroSaw and Piezosurgery in Harvesting Mandibular Bone Blocks from the Retromolar Region: A Randomized Split-Mouth Prospective Clinical Trial

被引:10
|
作者
Hanser, Thomas [1 ]
Doliveux, Romain [1 ]
机构
[1] Int Dent Implant Ctr, Private Clin Schloss Schellenstein, Olsberg, Germany
关键词
autogenous bone graft; bone block graft; bone harvesting; external oblique ridge bone graft; mandibular bone graft; MicroSaw; piezoelectric surgical device; Piezosurgery; ramus bone graft; retromolar bone graft; LID APPROACH; SINUS FLOOR; GRAFT; AUGMENTATION; MORBIDITY; IMPLANT; SURGERY; RAMUS; EXTRACTION; GUIDELINES;
D O I
10.11607/jomi.4416
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Purpose: The aim of this randomized prospective split-mouth clinical trial was to evaluate the outcome of bone block harvesting from the retromolar region using the MicroSaw and Piezosurgery. Materials and Methods: Fifty-three patients for extensive bilateral bone grafting procedures with or without concomitant implant placement in the maxilla and/or mandible were scheduled. In each patient, bone blocks were harvested in the retromolar area within the external oblique ridge of the mandible. Using a randomized protocol, bone blocks were harvested with the MicroSaw and Piezosurgery either from the right or the left side. Clinical outcome parameters were the comparison of osteotomy time; volume of block graft; and clinical determination of intraoperative complications such as hemorrhage, nerve injury, pain, swelling, and healing of the donor site. Results: The mean osteotomy time for harvesting including luxating a bone block was 5.63 (+/- 1.37) minutes using the MicroSaw and 16.47 (+/- 2.74) minutes using Piezosurgery (P < .05). A mean graft volume of 1.62 (+/- 0.27) cm(3) was measured with the MicroSaw and 1.26 (+/- 0.27) cm(3) with the piezoelectric surgical device (P < .05). No heavy bleeding at the donor site occurred in any of the cases. Complications due to injury of adjacent teeth or nerve lesion of the mandibular nerve were not observed in any cases. According to a scale, there was little postoperative pain with both instruments, and it decreased within 14 days postoperatively (P > .05). Swelling did not appear significantly different either (P >.05), and none of the donor sites showed primary healing complications. Conclusion: The data described in this randomized prospective split-mouth clinical trial indicate that the MicroSaw and Piezosurgery allowed efficient and safe bone block harvesting from the external oblique ridge. Clinically, concerning harvesting time and volume of the grafts, the MicroSaw performed significantly better, whereas pain, swelling, and healing did not appear to be considerably different. Given the improved visibility, precise cut geometries, and the margin of safety afforded by the MicroSaw and Piezosurgery, they are both instruments of choice when harvesting bone from the retromolar area.
引用
收藏
页码:365 / 372
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Is the only buccal infiltration anesthesia enough for extraction of mandibular anterior incisors and premolar teeth? A split-mouth randomized clinical trial
    Bilal Ege
    Mehmet Demirkol
    Clinical Oral Investigations, 2021, 25 : 3077 - 3085
  • [22] Utilization of a periodontal endoscope in nonsurgical periodontal therapy: A randomized, split-mouth clinical trial
    Wright, Hillary N.
    Mayer, Elizabeth T.
    Lallier, Thomas E.
    Maney, Pooja
    JOURNAL OF PERIODONTOLOGY, 2023, 94 (08) : 933 - 943
  • [23] The Effect of Three Desensitizing Agents on Dentin Hypersensitivity: A Randomized, Split-mouth Clinical Trial
    Torres, C. R. G.
    Silva, T. M.
    Fonseca, B. M.
    Sales, A. L. L. S.
    Holleben, P.
    Di Nicolo, R.
    Borges, A. B.
    OPERATIVE DENTISTRY, 2014, 39 (05) : E186 - E194
  • [24] Effect of laser corticotomy on canine retraction rate: a split-mouth randomized clinical trial
    Toodehzaeim, Mohammad Hossein
    Maybodi, Fahimeh Rashidi
    Rafiei, Elaheh
    Toodehzaeim, Pedram
    Karimi, Negin
    BMC ORAL HEALTH, 2024, 24 (01)
  • [25] Lateral approach for sinus floor elevation: large versus small bone window - a split-mouth randomized clinical trial
    Baldini, Nicola
    D'Elia, Chiara
    Bianco, Andrea
    Goracci, Cecilia
    de Sanctis, Massimo
    Ferrari, Marco
    CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH, 2017, 28 (08) : 974 - 981
  • [26] The influence of electrical high-speed rotation on mandibular third molar surgeries: a prospective, randomized, split-mouth clinical and radiographic study
    Sol, Izabella
    Tonini, Karen Rawen
    dos Reis, Karen Santin
    Hadad, Henrique
    Ponzoni, Daniela
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2024, 14 (01)
  • [27] Comparison of clinical efficacy and patient acceptance of interdental brush and silicone coated interdental pick: a randomized split-mouth, prospective clinical trial
    Ustaoglu, Gulbahar
    Ercan, Esra
    Gumus, Kerem Caglar
    CLINICAL ORAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2020, 24 (06) : 2121 - 2127
  • [28] Comparison of clinical efficacy and patient acceptance of interdental brush and silicone coated interdental pick: a randomized split-mouth, prospective clinical trial
    Gülbahar Ustaoğlu
    Esra Ercan
    Kerem Çağlar Gümüş
    Clinical Oral Investigations, 2020, 24 : 2121 - 2127
  • [29] Acupuncture on anxiety and inflammatory events following surgery of mandibular third molars: a split-mouth, randomized, triple-blind clinical trial
    Armond, A. C. V.
    Gloria, J. C. R.
    dos Santos, C. R. R.
    Galo, R.
    Falci, S. G. M.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2019, 48 (02) : 274 - 281
  • [30] Anti-Inflammatory Effectiveness of Oral Dexamethasone 4 mg on Mandibular Third Molar Surgeries: A Split-Mouth Randomized Clinical Trial
    de Oliveira, Eulalia Mendes
    Oliveira, Victor Bento
    Araujo, Lana Karine
    Lopes, Timoteo Sousa
    Rego, Rodrigo Otavio
    Sampieri, Marcelo Bonifacio da Silva
    JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2021, 79 (05) : 981 - 988