Cargando…
Usefulness of Magnetic Mallet in Oral Surgery and Implantology: A Systematic Review
This systematic review aimed to answer the question: “Is the use of magnetic mallet effective in oral and implant surgery procedures in terms of tissue healing, surgery outcome, and complication rate compared to traditional instruments?” A literature search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science data...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8781210/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35055423 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jpm12010108 |
_version_ | 1784638035362578432 |
---|---|
author | Bennardo, Francesco Barone, Selene Vocaturo, Camillo Nucci, Ludovica Antonelli, Alessandro Giudice, Amerigo |
author_facet | Bennardo, Francesco Barone, Selene Vocaturo, Camillo Nucci, Ludovica Antonelli, Alessandro Giudice, Amerigo |
author_sort | Bennardo, Francesco |
collection | PubMed |
description | This systematic review aimed to answer the question: “Is the use of magnetic mallet effective in oral and implant surgery procedures in terms of tissue healing, surgery outcome, and complication rate compared to traditional instruments?” A literature search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases (articles published until 1 October 2021) was conducted, in accordance with the PRISMA statement, using the keywords “magnetic mallet”, “electric mallet”, “oral surgery”, “implantology”, and “dental implant”. Of 252 articles, 14 were included in the review (3 for teeth extraction, and 11 for implant dentistry). Out of a total of 619 dental extractions (256 patients) performed with the magnetic mallet (MM), no complications were reported. Implants inserted totaled 880 (525 patients): 640 in the MM groups (382), and 240 in control groups (133). The survival rate of implants was 98.9% in the MM groups, and 95.42% in the control groups. Seven patients experienced benign paroxysmal positional vertigo after implant surgery, all in control groups. Results are not sufficient to establish the effectiveness of MM in oral and implant surgery procedures. Randomized controlled trials with a large sample size are needed. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8781210 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87812102022-01-22 Usefulness of Magnetic Mallet in Oral Surgery and Implantology: A Systematic Review Bennardo, Francesco Barone, Selene Vocaturo, Camillo Nucci, Ludovica Antonelli, Alessandro Giudice, Amerigo J Pers Med Review This systematic review aimed to answer the question: “Is the use of magnetic mallet effective in oral and implant surgery procedures in terms of tissue healing, surgery outcome, and complication rate compared to traditional instruments?” A literature search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases (articles published until 1 October 2021) was conducted, in accordance with the PRISMA statement, using the keywords “magnetic mallet”, “electric mallet”, “oral surgery”, “implantology”, and “dental implant”. Of 252 articles, 14 were included in the review (3 for teeth extraction, and 11 for implant dentistry). Out of a total of 619 dental extractions (256 patients) performed with the magnetic mallet (MM), no complications were reported. Implants inserted totaled 880 (525 patients): 640 in the MM groups (382), and 240 in control groups (133). The survival rate of implants was 98.9% in the MM groups, and 95.42% in the control groups. Seven patients experienced benign paroxysmal positional vertigo after implant surgery, all in control groups. Results are not sufficient to establish the effectiveness of MM in oral and implant surgery procedures. Randomized controlled trials with a large sample size are needed. MDPI 2022-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8781210/ /pubmed/35055423 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jpm12010108 Text en © 2022 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 | Review Bennardo, Francesco Barone, Selene Vocaturo, Camillo Nucci, Ludovica Antonelli, Alessandro Giudice, Amerigo Usefulness of Magnetic Mallet in Oral Surgery and Implantology: A Systematic Review |
title | Usefulness of Magnetic Mallet in Oral Surgery and Implantology: A Systematic Review |
title_full | Usefulness of Magnetic Mallet in Oral Surgery and Implantology: A Systematic Review |
title_fullStr | Usefulness of Magnetic Mallet in Oral Surgery and Implantology: A Systematic Review |
title_full_unstemmed | Usefulness of Magnetic Mallet in Oral Surgery and Implantology: A Systematic Review |
title_short | Usefulness of Magnetic Mallet in Oral Surgery and Implantology: A Systematic Review |
title_sort | usefulness of magnetic mallet in oral surgery and implantology: a systematic review |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8781210/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35055423 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jpm12010108 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bennardofrancesco usefulnessofmagneticmalletinoralsurgeryandimplantologyasystematicreview AT baroneselene usefulnessofmagneticmalletinoralsurgeryandimplantologyasystematicreview AT vocaturocamillo usefulnessofmagneticmalletinoralsurgeryandimplantologyasystematicreview AT nucciludovica usefulnessofmagneticmalletinoralsurgeryandimplantologyasystematicreview AT antonellialessandro usefulnessofmagneticmalletinoralsurgeryandimplantologyasystematicreview AT giudiceamerigo usefulnessofmagneticmalletinoralsurgeryandimplantologyasystematicreview |