Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31662998›Full record

Observational studyBioMed research international2019

Observational Study on the Preparation of the Implant Site with Piezosurgery vs. Drill: Comparison between the Two Methods in terms of Postoperative Pain, Surgical Times, and Operational Advantages.

Michele Maglione, Lorenzo Bevilacqua, Federica Dotto, Fulvia Costantinides, Felice Lorusso, Antonio Scarano

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in BioMed research international, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03978923 (Observational Study on the Preparation of the Implant Site With Piezosurgery vs Drill), which is not on this map. Cited by 19 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03978923 completednot on this map

Observational Study on the Preparation of the Implant Site With Piezosurgery vs Drill: Comparison Between the Two Methods in Terms of Post-operative Pain, Surgical Times and Operational Advantages

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity of TriesteRan2013 to 2017Enrolled75ConditionsPreparation of the Implant Site With Piezosurgery vs DrillArmspreparation of the implant site with Piezosurgery vs drill
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Michele MaglioneDepartment of Medical Sciences, University of Trieste, 34127 Trieste, Italy.
Lorenzo BevilacquaDepartment of Medical Sciences, University of Trieste, 34127 Trieste, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7245-8358
Federica DottoDepartment of Medical Sciences, University of Trieste, 34127 Trieste, Italy.
Fulvia CostantinidesDepartment of Medical Sciences, University of Trieste, 34127 Trieste, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6044-7531
Felice LorussoDepartment of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences and CeSi-MeT, University of Chieti-Pescara, Via Dei Vestini 31, 66100 Chieti, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2660-9231
Antonio ScaranoDepartment of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences and CeSi-MeT, University of Chieti-Pescara, Via Dei Vestini 31, 66100 Chieti, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5528-0853

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRecent advances show that ultrasonic implant site osteotomy is related to a decreased trauma and a better postoperative healing of the surgical site when compared to traditional drilling techniques. The micrometric bone cutting control and the operative advantages related to the piezoelectric approach are also characterized by a learning curve for the clinician in surgical practice and an increased operative duration of the procedure. The aim of this investigation is to compare the operative time, the postoperative pain, and the amount of painkillers taken by the patient during the healing period.

methodsA total of 65 patients were treated at the Unit of Oral Surgery (Department of Medical Sciences, Surgery and Health, University of Trieste, Italy) using a split mouth model: 75 drill-inserted implants (G1) and 75 piezoelectric device-inserted implants (G2) were placed. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was performed to evaluate the postoperative pain at 15 days from surgery. The operative time and frequency of intake of painkillers were measured.

resultsThe G1 and G2 groups showed a significant difference with a higher use of painkillers observed for G1. The G2 patients showed a lower level of pain (VAS) at all experimental times between 8 hours to 7 days (

conclusionsThe evidence supports the application of the piezoelectric approach compared to the drill's osteotomy as a useful technique for implant site preparation. This trial is registered with NCT03978923.

Indexed as

AgedDental Implantation, EndosseousDental ImplantsFemaleHumansItalyMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeOsteotomyPiezosurgeryPostoperative PainDental Implants

Identifiers

PMID31662998
PMCPMC6791234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.