Cargando…

Comparison between Magneto-Dynamic, Piezoelectric, and Conventional Surgery for Dental Extractions: A Pilot Study

This pilot split-mouth study aimed to evaluate and compare early postoperative discomfort and wound healing outcomes in post-extraction sockets after dental extraction performed with a Magnetic Mallet (MM), piezosurgery, and conventional instruments (EudraCT 2022-003135-25). Twenty-two patients requ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bennardo, Francesco, Barone, Selene, Vocaturo, Camillo, Gheorghe, Dorin Nicolae, Cosentini, Giorgio, Antonelli, Alessandro, Giudice, Amerigo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10047157/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36975557
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/dj11030060
_version_ 1785013850788069376
author Bennardo, Francesco
Barone, Selene
Vocaturo, Camillo
Gheorghe, Dorin Nicolae
Cosentini, Giorgio
Antonelli, Alessandro
Giudice, Amerigo
author_facet Bennardo, Francesco
Barone, Selene
Vocaturo, Camillo
Gheorghe, Dorin Nicolae
Cosentini, Giorgio
Antonelli, Alessandro
Giudice, Amerigo
author_sort Bennardo, Francesco
collection PubMed
description This pilot split-mouth study aimed to evaluate and compare early postoperative discomfort and wound healing outcomes in post-extraction sockets after dental extraction performed with a Magnetic Mallet (MM), piezosurgery, and conventional instruments (EudraCT 2022-003135-25). Twenty-two patients requiring the extraction of three non-adjacent teeth were included. Each tooth was randomly assigned to a specific treatment (control, MM, or piezosurgery). Outcome measures were the severity of symptoms after surgery, wound healing assessed at the 10-days follow-up visit, and the time taken to complete each procedure (excluding suturing). Two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s multiple comparisons tests were performed to evaluate eventual differences between groups. There were no statistically significant differences between the compared methods in postoperative pain and healing, and no additional complications were reported. MM required significantly less time to perform a tooth extraction, followed by conventional instruments and piezosurgery, in increasing order (p < 0.05). Overall, the present findings suggest the use of MM and piezosurgery as valid options for dental extractions. Further randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm and extend this study’s results, facilitating the selection of the optimal method for an individual patient depending on the patient’s needs and preferences.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10047157
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100471572023-03-29 Comparison between Magneto-Dynamic, Piezoelectric, and Conventional Surgery for Dental Extractions: A Pilot Study Bennardo, Francesco Barone, Selene Vocaturo, Camillo Gheorghe, Dorin Nicolae Cosentini, Giorgio Antonelli, Alessandro Giudice, Amerigo Dent J (Basel) Article This pilot split-mouth study aimed to evaluate and compare early postoperative discomfort and wound healing outcomes in post-extraction sockets after dental extraction performed with a Magnetic Mallet (MM), piezosurgery, and conventional instruments (EudraCT 2022-003135-25). Twenty-two patients requiring the extraction of three non-adjacent teeth were included. Each tooth was randomly assigned to a specific treatment (control, MM, or piezosurgery). Outcome measures were the severity of symptoms after surgery, wound healing assessed at the 10-days follow-up visit, and the time taken to complete each procedure (excluding suturing). Two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s multiple comparisons tests were performed to evaluate eventual differences between groups. There were no statistically significant differences between the compared methods in postoperative pain and healing, and no additional complications were reported. MM required significantly less time to perform a tooth extraction, followed by conventional instruments and piezosurgery, in increasing order (p < 0.05). Overall, the present findings suggest the use of MM and piezosurgery as valid options for dental extractions. Further randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm and extend this study’s results, facilitating the selection of the optimal method for an individual patient depending on the patient’s needs and preferences. MDPI 2023-02-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10047157/ /pubmed/36975557 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/dj11030060 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Bennardo, Francesco
Barone, Selene
Vocaturo, Camillo
Gheorghe, Dorin Nicolae
Cosentini, Giorgio
Antonelli, Alessandro
Giudice, Amerigo
Comparison between Magneto-Dynamic, Piezoelectric, and Conventional Surgery for Dental Extractions: A Pilot Study
title Comparison between Magneto-Dynamic, Piezoelectric, and Conventional Surgery for Dental Extractions: A Pilot Study
title_full Comparison between Magneto-Dynamic, Piezoelectric, and Conventional Surgery for Dental Extractions: A Pilot Study
title_fullStr Comparison between Magneto-Dynamic, Piezoelectric, and Conventional Surgery for Dental Extractions: A Pilot Study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between Magneto-Dynamic, Piezoelectric, and Conventional Surgery for Dental Extractions: A Pilot Study
title_short Comparison between Magneto-Dynamic, Piezoelectric, and Conventional Surgery for Dental Extractions: A Pilot Study
title_sort comparison between magneto-dynamic, piezoelectric, and conventional surgery for dental extractions: a pilot study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10047157/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36975557
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/dj11030060
work_keys_str_mv AT bennardofrancesco comparisonbetweenmagnetodynamicpiezoelectricandconventionalsurgeryfordentalextractionsapilotstudy
AT baroneselene comparisonbetweenmagnetodynamicpiezoelectricandconventionalsurgeryfordentalextractionsapilotstudy
AT vocaturocamillo comparisonbetweenmagnetodynamicpiezoelectricandconventionalsurgeryfordentalextractionsapilotstudy
AT gheorghedorinnicolae comparisonbetweenmagnetodynamicpiezoelectricandconventionalsurgeryfordentalextractionsapilotstudy
AT cosentinigiorgio comparisonbetweenmagnetodynamicpiezoelectricandconventionalsurgeryfordentalextractionsapilotstudy
AT antonellialessandro comparisonbetweenmagnetodynamicpiezoelectricandconventionalsurgeryfordentalextractionsapilotstudy
AT giudiceamerigo comparisonbetweenmagnetodynamicpiezoelectricandconventionalsurgeryfordentalextractionsapilotstudy