International Journal of Experimental Dental Science

Register      Login

VOLUME 10 , ISSUE 2 ( July-December, 2021 ) > List of Articles


Piezosurgery vs Conventional Osteotomy Procedures in Lower Third Molar Surgery: A Comparative Study

Prateek Tripathy, Chhaya Jha

Keywords : Bone, Extraction, Impacted teeth, Lignocaine, Swelling

Citation Information : Tripathy P, Jha C. Piezosurgery vs Conventional Osteotomy Procedures in Lower Third Molar Surgery: A Comparative Study. Int J Experiment Dent Sci 2021; 10 (2):49-53.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10029-1236

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 17-02-2023

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; The Author(s).


Introduction: Third molar impaction surgery is the mainstay of oral and maxillofacial surgery practice. Impaction of tooth is a condition in which a tooth fails to erupt to the normal functional position beyond the chronological age, due to lack of space or physical barrier. The removal of impacted lower third molar may require extensive bone removal leading to post operative complications like pain, edema, trismus, dry socket, hemorrhage etc. Aim: The primary aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of piezosurgery over conventional osteotomy on post operative sequelae of third molar impaction surgery. Materials and methodology: Traditionally rotary instruments like burs are used for osteotomy procedures.A study was done on 120 patients and post operative sequelae were compared for conventional osteotomy and piezosurgery. Results: The results showed lesser post operative edema,trismusetc in the piezosurgery group which were statistically significant. Discussion: Piezosurgery has therefore become a promising alternative to traditional methods of osteotomy.

PDF Share
  1. Singh V, Alex K, Pradhan R, et al. Techniques in the removal of impacted mandibular third molar: a comparative study. Eur J Gen Dent 2013;2(1):25–30. DOI: 10.4103/2278-9626.106799
  2. Horton JE, Tarpley TM, Wood LD. The healing of surgical defects in alveolar bone produced with ultrasonic instrumentation, chisel and rotary bur. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1975;39(4):536–545. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(75)90192-9
  3. Piersanti L, Dilorenzo M, Monaco G, et al. Piezosurgery or conventional rotatory instruments for inferior third molar extractions? J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014;10(9):464–469. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2014.04.03
  4. Barone A, Marconcini S, Giacomelli L, et al. A randomized evaluation of ultrasound bone surgery versus traditional rotary instruments in lower third molar extraction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;68(2):330–336. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2009.03.053
  5. Goyal M, Marya K, Jhamb A, et al. Comparative evaluation of surgical outcome after removal of impacted mandibular third molars using a piezotome or a conventional handpiece: a prospective study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;50(6):451–453. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2011.10.010
  6. Bilginaylar K, Uyanik LO. Evaluation of the effects of platelet-rich fibrin and piezosurgery on outcomes after removal of ımpacted mandibular third molars. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2016;54(6):629–633. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2016.03.016
  7. Al-Moraissi EA, Elmansi YA, Al-Sharaee YA, et al. Does the piezoelectric surgical technique produce fewer postoperative sequelae after lower third molar surgery than conventional rotary instruments? A systematic review and meta analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2016;45(3):383–391. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2015.10.005
  8. 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):1066–1079. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2016.07.020
  9. Sivolella S,Berengo M, Bressan E, et al. Osteotomy for lower third molar germectomy: randomized prospective clinical study comparing piezosurgery and conventional rotatory osteotomy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011;69(6):e15–e23. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2010.12.036
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.