Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=26469902
&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 217.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 217.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 217.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 217.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 217.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 217.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 217.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 217.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 251.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 251.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 251.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 251.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 251.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534
Warning: imagejpeg(C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\phplern\26469902
.jpg): Failed to open stream: No such file or directory in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 117 Medicine+(Baltimore)
2015 ; 94
(41
): e1685
Nephropedia Template TP
gab.com Text
Twit Text FOAVip
Twit Text #
English Wikipedia
Piezoelectric Versus Conventional Rotary Techniques for Impacted Third Molar
Extraction: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
#MMPMID26469902
Jiang Q
; Qiu Y
; Yang C
; Yang J
; Chen M
; Zhang Z
Medicine (Baltimore)
2015[Oct]; 94
(41
): e1685
PMID26469902
show ga
Impacted third molars are frequently encountered in clinical work. Surgical
removal of impacted third molars is often required to prevent clinical symptoms.
Traditional rotary cutting instruments are potentially injurious, and
piezosurgery, as a new osteotomy technique, has been introduced in oral and
maxillofacial surgery. No consistent conclusion has been reached regarding
whether this new technique is associated with fewer or less severe postoperative
sequelae after third molar extraction.The aim of this study was to compare
piezosurgery with rotary osteotomy techniques, with regard to surgery time and
the severity of postoperative sequelae, including pain, swelling, and trismus.We
conducted a systematic literature search in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase,
and Google Scholar.The eligibility criteria of this study included the following:
the patients were clearly diagnosed as having impacted mandibular third molars;
the patients underwent piezosurgery osteotomy, and in the control group rotary
osteotomy techniques, for removing impacted third molars; the outcomes of
interest include surgery time, trismus, swelling or pain; the studies are
randomized controlled trials.We used random-effects models to calculate the
difference in the outcomes, and the corresponding 95% confidence interval. We
calculated the weighted mean difference if the trials used the same measurement,
and a standardized mean difference if otherwise.A total of seven studies met the
eligibility criteria and were included in our analysis. Compared with rotary
osteotomy, patients undergoing piezosurgery experienced longer surgery time (mean
difference 4.13 minutes, 95% confidence interval 2.75-5.52, P?0.0001). Patients
receiving the piezoelectric technique had less swelling at postoperative days 1,
3, 5, and 7 (all Ps ?0.023). Additionally, there was a trend of less
postoperative pain and trismus in the piezosurgery groups.The number of included
randomized controlled trials and the sample size of each trial were relatively
small, double blinding was not possible, and cost analysis was unavailable due to
a lack of data.Our meta-analysis indicates that although patients undergoing
piezosurgery experienced longer surgery time, they had less postoperative
swelling, indicating that piezosurgery is a promising alternative technique for
extraction of impacted third molars.