Purpose: This study aimed to assess the stability and survival rate of dental implants inserted with different site preparation techniques-piezoelectric inserts versus traditional rotary instruments.

Materials And Methods: Correlative research was located by searching articles in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. This was accomplished independently by two different reviewers and supplemented by a manual search. Only prospective studies evaluating piezoelectric vs conventional implant site preparation in dental implantation were included in this review. A meta-analysis was performed on the stability and survival rate of implants.

Results: One thousand fifty-five articles were identified following the search strategy, of which five studies were finally included in this meta-analysis. With regard to the survival rate of implants, there was no statistically significant difference between piezoelectric and conventional implant site preparation (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.94, 1.03; I = 0%, P = .86). On the other side, the piezoelectric group had better stability in the eighth week (MD = 4.24, 95% CI: 1.36, 7.12; I = 0%, P = .80) and 12th week (MD = 3.33, 95% CI: 0.59, 6.08; I = 0%, P = .87) compared with the conventional group.

Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, it suggests that the survival rate of implants may not be influenced by the site preparation techniques (piezoelectric vs conventional), but the piezoelectric group may achieve better stability than the conventional group.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.11607/jomi.5913DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

survival rate
20
site preparation
16
stability survival
12
piezoelectric conventional
12
rate dental
8
dental implants
8
review meta-analysis
8
conventional implant
8
implant site
8
rate implants
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!