Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35055423›Full record

ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2022

Usefulness of Magnetic Mallet in Oral Surgery and Implantology: A Systematic Review.

Francesco Bennardo, Selene Barone, Camillo Vocaturo, Ludovica Nucci, Alessandro Antonelli, Amerigo Giudice

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07424820 (Clinical Comparative Analysis of Magnetic Mallet and Conventional Drilling Techniques for Implant Placement in D4 Bone), which is not on this map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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.

NCT07424820 naenrolling by invitationnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Clinical Comparative Analysis of Magnetic Mallet and Conventional Drilling Techniques for Implant Placement in D4 Bone: A Prospective Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of MosulRan2025 to 2026Enrolled30ConditionsAlveolar Bone Loss, Dental Implant, Osseodensification Drilling TechniqueArmsConventional drilling osteotomy, Magnetic mallet osteotomy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Biomarker Expression of Peri-Implantitis Lesions before and after Treatment: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The Sympathetic Nervous System in Dental Implantology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Francesco BennardoSchool of Dentistry, Department of Health Sciences, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, Viale Europa, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6528-2681
Selene BaroneSchool of Dentistry, Department of Health Sciences, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, Viale Europa, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.
Camillo VocaturoPrivate Practice, Via Nicola Serra 80, 87100 Cosenza, Italy.
Ludovica NucciMultidisciplinary Department of Medical-Surgical and Dental Specialties, University of Study of Campania, Luigi Vanvitelli, 80138 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7174-7596
Alessandro AntonelliSchool of Dentistry, Department of Health Sciences, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, Viale Europa, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9557-3586
Amerigo GiudiceSchool of Dentistry, Department of Health Sciences, Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro, Viale Europa, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9374-0566
Magna Graecia University · ITAzienda Ospedaliera di Cosenza · ITUniversity of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

alveolar ridge augmentationdental implantssinus floor augmentationtooth extraction

Identifiers

PMID35055423
PMCPMC8781210
OpenAlexW4206317080

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.