Comparison between conventional drilling and piezoelectric surgery

A recent study has compared conventional drilling methods with piezoelectric surgery as a method for placing zygomatic implants.

Zygomatic implants can be used in cases involving patients with severely atrophic maxillae where conventional bone augmentation procedures are unsuitable. Zygomatic implants are not without their risks, especially when preparing implant tunnels for placement. This process requires the use of long drills which can be difficult to control and can put parts of the anatomy such as the orbita and the brain at risk.

The authors of this study, from the universities of Naples, Bologna and Gothenburg, wanted to test the effectiveness of a piezoelectric surgery device compared with a conventional drill. The advantage of such a device is that it can be an effective and precise way of cutting bone without damaging the surrounding soft tissues.

To test the two methods, twenty patients with severely atrophic maxillae were examined. All received zygomatic implants prepared using either piezoelectric surgery or conventional rotational drills. All implants had a 4.3mm diameter and any implants with an insertion torque higher than 40Ncm were immediately loaded.

The results showed that six complications occurred at drilled sites, while only three occurred at piezoelectric surgery sites, although this was not considered statistically significant. Overall both approaches achieved similar results, though implant placement with conventional drilling was found to take less time.