Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 7, 2026
06:09
Piezo High Accuracy Surgical Osteal Removal PHASOR: A Technique for Improved Cranial Window Surgery in Mice
Published on: March 2, 2018
11.1K
Retrospective Observational Study on Implant Site Preparation Using Magnetodynamic Surgery vs. Piezoelectric and
Lorenzo Bevilacqua1, Luca De Angelis1, Lucio Torelli1
1University Clinical Department of Medical, Surgical and Health Sciences, University of Trieste, 34129 Trieste, TS, Italy.
Journal of Clinical Medicine
|December 30, 2025
Summary
Magnetodynamic surgery (MM) and traditional drills (D) showed similar operative times, but MM reduced patient discomfort. Piezoelectric surgery (IP) preserved tissue but took longer. MM offers patient comfort advantages over traditional methods.
Area of Science:
- Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
- Dental Implantology
- Surgical Technology Comparison
Background:
- Implant site preparation is crucial for successful osseointegration.
- Traditional drills, piezoelectric devices, and magnetodynamic systems are used for site preparation.
- Patient comfort and operative efficiency are key considerations in surgical technique selection.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare magnetodynamic surgery (MM), traditional drill-based surgery (D), and piezoelectric surgery (IP) for dental implant site preparation.
- To evaluate differences in operative time and patient-reported intra/postoperative discomfort.
- To assess the influence of bone quality on surgical outcomes.
Main Methods:
- 86 patients underwent implant site preparation using MM, IP, or D.
- All procedures were performed by a single experienced surgeon.
- Data collected included bone quality, operative time, pain scores (VAS), and analgesic use; statistical analysis used Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests.
Main Results:
- Significant differences were observed in operative times and pain perception, influenced by bone density.
- MM and D had comparable operative times across different bone types, but D resulted in higher VAS pain scores.
- IP demonstrated significantly longer operative times compared to both MM and D, with variations in pain scores.
Conclusions:
- Traditional drill-based surgery remains a valid technique, but magnetodynamic surgery offers potential benefits for patient comfort and recovery.
- Piezoelectric surgery excels in tissue preservation but is associated with extended operative times.
- The choice of technique should consider a balance between operative efficiency, patient comfort, and tissue preservation needs.
