A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MANDIBULAR CYST ENUCLEATION USING THE PIEZOELECTRIC SURGERY VERSUS THE CONVENTIONAL TECHNIQUE

Ibrahim, Yasmine A.; Aly, Tarek M.; Ragab, Hala R.

doi:10.21608/adjalexu.2016.58052

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MANDIBULAR CYST ENUCLEATION USING THE PIEZOELECTRIC SURGERY VERSUS THE CONVENTIONAL TECHNIQUE

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

¹ Dentist, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt

² - Professor of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt

³ Assistant Professor of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt.

10.21608/adjalexu.2016.58052

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: piezosurgery device was originally developed for the atraumatic cutting of bone as it produces microvibrations and specific ultrasound frequency (25-29 kHz). This new ultrasonic cutting method will be an alternative to conventional methods of oral surgery. OBJECTIVES: This study compares the use of piezosurgery and conventional technique in mandibular radicular cyst enucleation and this was estimated by clinical and radiographic analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was conducted on fourteen patients selected from the Out-patient Clinic of the Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University. Patients with radicular cyst in jaw region were diagnosed clinically and radiographically. The patients were randomly divided into two groups, seven patients were treated using piezosurgery and other seven patients were treated using conventional surgical procedures. Intraoperative and postoperative evaluation was carried out to monitor soft tissue damage, manipulation complexity, pain, infection and tissue dehiscence at 1st, 2nd, 7th day and after one month postoperatively. The bone healing and bone density was determined radiographically after 3 and 6 months postoperatively using Cone Beam Computed tomography. RESULTS: no soft tissue damage or manipulation complexities were observed in both groups, less bleeding was observed intraoperatively in piezosurgery group. Healing was uneventful with no signs of dehiscence in piezosurgery group with lower pain score than in control group. There was a significant decrease in the surface area of the bone defect in the piezosurgery group compared to control group along the follow up period. The improvement in the bone density was greater in the piezosurgery group than in the control group, with percent of difference 33.42% on the 3rd month and 63.84% on the 6th month. CONCLUSIONS: Piezosurgery is effective in cyst enucleation as it accelerates bone healing and reduces intraoperative and postoperative complications

Keywords

References

1. High AS, Robinson PA, Klein CE. Discrimination of parakeratinised odontogenic keratocysts from other odontogenic and non-odontogenic cyst types by expression of a 38kd cellsurface glycoprotein. J Oral Pathol Med 1993; 22: 363-7.
2. Stoelinga PJ. Long-term follow-up on keratocysts treated according to a defined protocol. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001; 30: 14-25.
3. Myoung H, Hong SP, Hong SD, Lee JI, Lim CY, Choung PH, et al. Odontogenic keratocyst: Review of 256 cases for recurrence and clinicopathologic parameters. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2001; 91: 328-33.
4. NairPNR.Reviewnewperspectivesonradicularcysts:do they heal? Int Endod J 1998; 31: 155-60.
5. Aslan M, Şimşek G. Large residual dental cyst (A case report). Atatürk University J Vet Sci 2002; 12: 45-9.
6. Goaz PW, White SC. Oral radiology: principles and interpretation 3rd ed. St Louis, Mo: Mosby–Year Book, 1994. 398-676.
7. Damante JH, Guerra EN, Ferreira Jr O. Spontaneous resolution of simple bone cysts. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2002; 31: 182-6.
8. Sohn DS. Piezoelectric bone surgery presented at the 12th Taipei congress of oral implantoglogist, Taipei, Taiwan. 2003. 27-9.
9. HortonJE,TarpleyTM,WoodLD.Thehealingofsurgical defects in alveolar bone produced with ultrasonic instrumentation, chisel and rotator bur. Oral Surg oral Med Oral Path 1975; 39: 536-46.
10. Vercelotti T, DePaoli S, Nevins M. The piezoelectric bony window osteotomy and sinus membrane elevation: introduction of a new technique for simplification of the sinus augmentation procedure. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2001; 21: 561-7.
11. Preti G, Martinasso G, Peirone B, Navone R, Manzella C, Muzio G, et al. Cytokines and growth factors involved in the osseointegration of oral titanium implants positioned using piezoelectric bone surgery versus a drill technique: a pilot study in mini pigs. J Periodontol 2007; 78: 716-22.
12.Yaman Z, Suer BT. Clinical comparison of ultrasonic surgery and conventional surgical techniques for enucleating jaw cysts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013; 42: 1462-8.
13. Kocyigit ID, Atil F, Alp YE, Tekin U, Tuz HH. Piezosurgery versus conventional surgery in radicular cyst enucleation. J Craniofac Surg 2012; 23: 1805-8.
14. Ghanbari JA, Makvandi A, Pazouki A. Quality of sleep for hospitalized patients in Rasoul-Akram hospital. Med J Islam Repub Iran 2014; 21: 73.
15.Yang B, Girod S. Efficacy of Bone Healing in Calvarial Defects Using Piezoelectric Surgical Instruments. J Craniofac Surg 2014; 25: 149-53.
16.Anuroopa P, Kishan Panicker G, Nalini MS, Bipin CR. Piezosurgery in Dentistry: A Versatile Tool in Bone Management. J Dent Sci 2014; 2: 32-7.
17. Retzepi M, Donos N. The Effect of Diabetes Mellitus on Osseous Healing. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010; 21: 673-81.
18. Levin L, Schwartz-Arad D. The effect of cigarette smoking on dental implants and related surgery. Implant Dent 2005;
14: 357-61.
19. Balaji SM. Tobacco smoking and surgical healing of oral
tissues: a review. Indian J Dent Res 2008; 19: 344-8.
20.Erdogan O. Electromagnetic Interference on Pacemakers.
Indian Pacing Electrophysiol J 2002; 2: 74-8.
21. Shweel M, Amer M I, ELshamanhory AF. A comparative study of cone beam CT and multi detector CT in the preoperative assessment of odontogenic cysts and tumors.
Egy J Radio and Nucl Med 2013; 44: 23-32.
22. Suomalainen A. Cone beam computed tomography in oral radiology. Academic Dissertation, Department of Oral Radiology Institute of Dentistry, University of Helsinki.
2010.
23.Pappalardo S, Guarnieri R. Randomized clinical study
comparing piezosurgery and conventional rotatory surgery in mandibular cyst enucleation, J Cranio Maxillofac Surg 2013; 1-6.
24.Jiang Q, Qiu Y, Yang C, Yang J, Chen M, Zhang Z. piezoelectric versus conventional Rotary Techniques for Impacted Third Molar Extraction. J Med 2015; 94: 1-7.
25. Vercellotti T, Nevins ML, Kim DM, Nevins M, Wada K, Schenk RK, et al. Osseous response following resective therapy with piezosurgery. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2005; 25: 543-9.
26.Esteves JC, Marcantonio Jr E, Faloni AP, Rocha F, Marcantonio R, Wilk K, et al. Dynamics of bone healing after osteotomy with piezosurgery or conventional drilling – histomorphometrical, immunohistochemical, and molecular analysis. J Trans Med 2013; 11: 221.
27. Carini F, Saggese V, Porcao G, Baldoni M. Piezoelectric surgery in dentistry: a review, Minerva Stomatal 2014; 63: 7-34.
28.Hassan TZ. Comparative post-operative effect of the piezoelectricandrotatory osteotomytechniqueinimpacted lower third molars surgery. Master Thesis. Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery department. Alexandria University. 2010.
29. Norton MR, Gamble C. Bone classification: An objective scale of bone density using the computerized tomography scan. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001; 12: 79-84.