ArticleJournal of orthopaedic case reports2026
A Comparative Study of Piezoelectric Surgery versus High-Speed Drill in Cervical Spine Laminectomy.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic case reports, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Piezoelectric bone surgery is an emerging technique that facilitates the selective cutting of mineralized tissue while preserving soft tissue integrity. Conventional tools such as the high-speed drill (HSD) and Kerrison rongeur are associated with complications, such as dural tears and neurovascular injury. This study compares intraoperative and post-operative (operative time, blood loss, complications, and post-operative pain) outcomes of cervical laminectomy performed using piezoelectric surgery (PS) versus high-speed drilling. Materials and Methods: A prospective comparative study was done, including forty-two patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy, who were enrolled from January 2019 to January 2025 for standard laminectomy levels from C3 to C6. They were allocated into two groups using the alternating allocation method. Twenty-one underwent primary laminectomy using a piezoelectric device (Piezotome), and twenty-one underwent laminectomy using an HSD. Results: The piezoelectric group (n = 21; 8 women, 13 men) had a mean age of 63 years and a mean pre-operative Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) score of 12.4 ± 2.4. The HSD group (n = 21; 5 women, 16 men) had a mean age of 61.2 years and a mJOA score of 12.2 ± 2.8. Laminectomy time per level was significantly shorter in the piezoelectric group (2.2 ± 0.8 min) compared to the HSD group (6.4 ± 2.2 min). Mean blood loss (after subtracting irrigated amount of Normal saline) was 220 mL in the piezoelectric group versus 412 mL in the HSD group. No dural tears occurred in the piezoelectric group, while two were reported in the HSD group. Post-operative pain (visual analog scale at 24 h) was also lower in the piezoelectric cohort (P < 0.05). Conclusion: PS demonstrates superior safety and efficiency in cervical laminectomy, with reduced operative time, blood loss, and complication rates compared to traditional high-speed drilling.
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.