ArticleInternational journal of dentistry2025
Comparative Evaluation of Piezosurgery Versus Conventional Surgical Implant Placement and Impact on Implant Stability, Bone Density, and Patient Comfort: A Randomized Clinical Study.
Article in International journal of dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to comparatively evaluate piezoelectric surgery and conventional surgery for dental implant site preparation, focusing on bone density, implant stability, and peri-implant marginal bone loss, to contribute valuable insights into optimizing dental implant procedures for improved patient care and treatment outcomes. Material and Methods: In this randomized controlled clinical trial with a split-mouth design, 30 patients with a mean age of 35.7 (standard deviation [SD] 7.1) with two edentulous sites, at least one of which was in the posterior mandibular region, were treated sequentially at two sites: Site A, where implant placement was conducted using piezoelectric surgery, and Site B, where conventional surgery was employed. Postsurgical evaluations were conducted at 6 and 9 months. Results: Significant differences were observed between the two techniques. Bone density was greater by 0.035 g/cm Conclusion: Piezoelectric surgery demonstrated potential benefits over conventional surgery in terms of implant stability, postoperative discomfort, and bone density. These findings highlight the potential of piezoelectric surgery to enhance clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction in dental implant procedures. Further investigation into long-term implant survival rates and esthetic outcomes is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.