Postoperative evaluation of Er:YAG laser, piezosurgery, and rotary systems used for osteotomy in mandibular third-molar extractions
Copyright © 2020 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved..
OBJECTIVE: This study compared patient postoperative pain, swelling, and trismus after usage of rotary instruments, piezosurgery, and Er:YAG lasers in mandibular third-molar extraction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was executed with class II and position B vertically impacted mandibular third molars. Patients were divided into three groups according to the osteotomy system used to remove retentive bone: rotary instruments, piezosurgery, and Er:YAG laser. Postoperative pain was evaluated using VAS questionnaires at 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 7 days after procedures. Trismus was evaluated by measuring the distance between the maxillary and mandibular incisors at maximum mouth opening, and comparing preoperative measurements with those for postoperative days 2 and 7. Analyses of swelling were carried out via a stereophotogrammetry system. Operation times were measured using a digital stopwatch from the initial incision to the final suture.
RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of pain, trismus, or swelling (p > 0.05). Pain persisted more in the rotary instrument group 24 h later (0 ± 1.3; p = 0.001). The pain scores obtained after 48 h for the piezosurgery (1.81 ± 2.29) and rotary (2.2 ± 2.12) groups were observed at 24 h in the laser group (2.19 ± 1.52). The mean operation time was highest using the laser (19.1 ± 3.85 min; p = 0.001) and lowest using rotary instruments (9.88 ± 2.97 min; p = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Piezosurgery and Er:YAG laser are good alternatives to rotary instrument systems in third-molar extraction, but both systems are slower than traditional rotary instruments.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2021 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2021 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:49 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery - 49(2021), 1 vom: 05. Jan., Seite 64-69 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Civak, Tayfun [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 12.01.2021 Date Revised 12.01.2021 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.jcms.2020.11.010 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM318638495 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM318638495 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231225165754.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231225s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.jcms.2020.11.010 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1062.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM318638495 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)33298388 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S1010-5182(20)30246-8 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Civak, Tayfun |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Postoperative evaluation of Er:YAG laser, piezosurgery, and rotary systems used for osteotomy in mandibular third-molar extractions |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 12.01.2021 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 12.01.2021 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2020 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a OBJECTIVE: This study compared patient postoperative pain, swelling, and trismus after usage of rotary instruments, piezosurgery, and Er:YAG lasers in mandibular third-molar extraction | ||
| 520 | |a MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was executed with class II and position B vertically impacted mandibular third molars. Patients were divided into three groups according to the osteotomy system used to remove retentive bone: rotary instruments, piezosurgery, and Er:YAG laser. Postoperative pain was evaluated using VAS questionnaires at 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 7 days after procedures. Trismus was evaluated by measuring the distance between the maxillary and mandibular incisors at maximum mouth opening, and comparing preoperative measurements with those for postoperative days 2 and 7. Analyses of swelling were carried out via a stereophotogrammetry system. Operation times were measured using a digital stopwatch from the initial incision to the final suture | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of pain, trismus, or swelling (p > 0.05). Pain persisted more in the rotary instrument group 24 h later (0 ± 1.3; p = 0.001). The pain scores obtained after 48 h for the piezosurgery (1.81 ± 2.29) and rotary (2.2 ± 2.12) groups were observed at 24 h in the laser group (2.19 ± 1.52). The mean operation time was highest using the laser (19.1 ± 3.85 min; p = 0.001) and lowest using rotary instruments (9.88 ± 2.97 min; p = 0.001) | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: Piezosurgery and Er:YAG laser are good alternatives to rotary instrument systems in third-molar extraction, but both systems are slower than traditional rotary instruments | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Er:YAG laser | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Piezosurgery | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Stereophotogrammetry | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Ustun, Tugba |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yilmaz, Hanife Nuray |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gursoy, Bahar |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery |d 1995 |g 49(2021), 1 vom: 05. Jan., Seite 64-69 |w (DE-627)NLM01277541X |x 1878-4119 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:49 |g year:2021 |g number:1 |g day:05 |g month:01 |g pages:64-69 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2020.11.010 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 49 |j 2021 |e 1 |b 05 |c 01 |h 64-69 | ||