Literature DB >> 18474063

Micromorphometrical analysis of conventional osteotomy techniques and ultrasonic osteotomy at the rabbit skull.

Peter Maurer1, Marcus S Kriwalsky, Rafael Block Veras, Jürgen Vogel, Frank Syrowatka, Christian Heiss.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The ultrasonic osteotome, which was recently introduced, is an alternative to conventional methods of osteotomy. The aim of the present study was to establish the differences between three osteotomy techniques and to perform a quantitative roughness analysis of the osteotomized bone surfaces.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fresh bony samples of standardized size were taken from the rabbit skull. The techniques used were as follows: reciprocate micro-saw, Lindemann bur, ultrasonic osteotome with the two insert tips OT6 (rough) and OT7 (fine). The prepared surfaces were examined by light microscopy, environmental surface electron microscopy (ESEM) and by confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM).
RESULTS: It was difficult to distinguish between cortical and cancellous bone after using the conventional osteotomy technique. The ultrasonic technique preserved the original structure of the bone. The values observed for superficial roughness were as follows: 3.97 microm (micro-saw), 5.7 microm (Lindemann bur), 2.48 microm (OT7) and 3 microm (OT6). There were statistical differences between the values of the bur and insert tip OT6 (P=0.015) as well as between the bur and insert tip OT7 (P=0.003).
CONCLUSIONS: In the present study micromorphological differences after using various osteotomy techniques could be clearly identified.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18474063     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01516.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Implants Res        ISSN: 0905-7161            Impact factor:   5.977


  7 in total

1.  Identification of possible factors influencing temperatures elevation during implant site preparation with piezoelectric technique.

Authors:  Luca Lamazza; Domenica Laurito; Marco Lollobrigida; Orlando Brugnoletti; Girolamo Garreffa; Alberto De Biase
Journal:  Ann Stomatol (Roma)       Date:  2015-02-09

2.  Bone Micromorphology and Material Attrition After Sonic, Ultrasonic and Conventional Osteotomies.

Authors:  Ashkan Rashad; Stefan Schwan; Alireza Nasirpour; Inge Schmitz; Henning Hanken; Reinhard E Friedrich; Martin Gosau
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2021 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.155

3.  [Methods of removing failed implants].

Authors:  Wan-Rong Wang; Xiao-Feng Chang; Long-Long He
Journal:  Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi       Date:  2018-04-01

4.  Dynamics of bone healing after osteotomy with piezosurgery or conventional drilling - histomorphometrical, immunohistochemical, and molecular analysis.

Authors:  Jônatas Caldeira Esteves; Elcio Marcantonio; Ana Paula de Souza Faloni; Fernanda Regina Godoy Rocha; Rosemary Adriana Marcantonio; Katarzyna Wilk; Giuseppe Intini
Journal:  J Transl Med       Date:  2013-09-23       Impact factor: 5.531

5.  Experimental Comparison of the Performance of Cutting Bone and Soft Tissue between Piezosurgery and Conventional Rotary Instruments.

Authors:  Yoshio Otake; Megumi Nakamura; Akiko Henmi; Tetsu Takahashi; Yasuyuki Sasano
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-11-21       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Observational Study on the Preparation of the Implant Site with Piezosurgery vs. Drill: Comparison between the Two Methods in terms of Postoperative Pain, Surgical Times, and Operational Advantages.

Authors:  Michele Maglione; Lorenzo Bevilacqua; Federica Dotto; Fulvia Costantinides; Felice Lorusso; Antonio Scarano
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2019-09-29       Impact factor: 3.411

7.  A Present Day Approach to Crown Lengthening - Piezosurgery.

Authors:  Vamsi Lavu; Chakravarthy Arumugam; Nivedha Venkatesan; Balaji Sk; Giri Valandhan Vedha
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2019-11-26
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.