Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38071300›Full record

Trial reportBMC oral health2023

A randomized controlled trial comparing conventional and piezosurgery methods in mandibular bone block harvesting from the retromolar region.

Ferit Bayram, Ahmet Demirci

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC oral health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05548049 (A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Conventional And Piezosurgery Method In Mandibular Bone Block Harvesting From The Retromolar Region), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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.

NCT05548049 nacompletednot on this map

A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Conventional And Piezosurgery Method In Mandibular Bone Block Harvesting From The Retromolar Region

TypeinterventionalSponsorMarmara UniversityRan2021 to 2022Enrolled19ConditionsAlveolar Bone ResorptionArmsBone harvesting from ramus area with piezosurgery for autogenous bone augmentation, Bone harvesting from ramus area with conventional burs for autogenous bone augmentation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ferit BayramDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University, Basibuyuk Yolu 9/3, Basibuyuk, Maltepe, Istanbul, 34854, Türkiye. ferit.bayram@marmara.edu.tr.
Ahmet DemirciDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University, Basibuyuk Yolu 9/3, Basibuyuk, Maltepe, Istanbul, 34854, Türkiye.
Marmara University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough piezosurgery is now commonly used for various applications in maxillofacial surgery, its advantages over conventional rotary instruments in terms of postoperative edema, ecchymosis, postoperative morbidity, and prolonged osteotomy time have been questioned. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis study aimed to compare the efficiency, postoperative morbidity, and complication rates of piezosurgery and conventional methods in harvesting autogenous ramus grafts. In this randomized controlled trial, 21 patients (32 sides) underwent autogenous graft harvesting from the ramus area, with 16 sites treated using piezosurgery and 16 using the conventional method. The primary outcomes measured were osteotomy time, total operation time, and postoperative morbidity. Complication rates were also evaluated.

resultsThe final analysis encompassed 19 patients, accounting for a total of 30 donor sites, following the exclusion of two patients who were unable to attend the scheduled follow-up visits. A total of 19 patients (30 donor sites) were included in the final analysis. No statistically significant difference was found in the mean osteotomy time between the piezosurgery group (mean: 10.35, SD: 2.74 min) and the conventional group (mean: 8.74, SD: 2.74 min) (95% CI: -3.67 to 0.442, p = 0.119). The total operation time, postoperative pain, and swelling were not significantly different between the two groups (p > 0.05). The complication rates, including wound dehiscence and inferior alveolar nerve exposure, were similar in both groups.

conclusionsPiezosurgery can be safely used for harvesting autogenous ramus grafts and does not increase osteotomy or total operation time compared to the conventional method. The postoperative morbidity and complication rates were also similar, indicating that both techniques can be effectively employed in clinical practice. CLINICAL

trial registrationThe protocol was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT05548049, First registration date: 21/09/2022).

Indexed as

MandiblePiezosurgeryEdemaHumansOsteotomyPostoperative ComplicationsPostoperative PainAlveolar ridge augmentationBone transplantationClinical trialDental implantationPiezosurgery

Identifiers

PMID38071300
PMCPMC10709954
OpenAlexW4389507520

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.