PURPOSE: The aim of this clinical study was to compare electrical versus hand mallet in osteotome-assisted surgery for maxillary bone condensing in immediately loaded implant procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Edentulous patients in maxillary premolar and molar regions with type III or IV bone were enrolled in this prospective clinical study. The patients were randomly divided in two groups: in the test group (magnetic mallet group [MMG]), the implant site was prepared with osteotomes pushed by electrical mallet, while in the control group (hand mallet group [HMG]), the implant site was performed with osteotomes pressed by hand mallet. Implants were immediately loaded. Intraoral digital radiographic measurements were reported at 6, 12, and 24 months. RESULTS:Fifty patients were enrolled in the study. Twenty-five patients were included in MMG and 25 patients in the HMG. One hundred thirty-eight dental implants were placed. In 12 cases, six in MMG and six in HMG, sinus elevation was performed. After 24-month follow-up, a survival rate of 94.93% was reported (MMG and HMG reported a survival rate of 97.10 and 92.75%, respectively, not statistically significant [P > .05]). In control group, two patients claimed benign paroxysmal positional vertigo following the use of osteotomes with hand hammer. Marginal bone levels remained stable over time for both groups, and no statistically significant differences were found. After 12 months, the bone height increased in both groups and, at 24 months, was stable. Statistical analysis reported no significant differences between test and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrated a stable marginal bone levels over time and a significant increase in bone height between 6 and 12 months in osteotome technique. The use of electrical mallet provided some essential clinical advantages for the patients during surgical procedure in comparison with hand mallet.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The aim of this clinical study was to compare electrical versus hand mallet in osteotome-assisted surgery for maxillary bone condensing in immediately loaded implant procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Edentulous patients in maxillary premolar and molar regions with type III or IV bone were enrolled in this prospective clinical study. The patients were randomly divided in two groups: in the test group (magnetic mallet group [MMG]), the implant site was prepared with osteotomes pushed by electrical mallet, while in the control group (hand mallet group [HMG]), the implant site was performed with osteotomes pressed by hand mallet. Implants were immediately loaded. Intraoral digital radiographic measurements were reported at 6, 12, and 24 months. RESULTS: Fifty patients were enrolled in the study. Twenty-five patients were included in MMG and 25 patients in the HMG. One hundred thirty-eight dental implants were placed. In 12 cases, six in MMG and six in HMG, sinus elevation was performed. After 24-month follow-up, a survival rate of 94.93% was reported (MMG and HMG reported a survival rate of 97.10 and 92.75%, respectively, not statistically significant [P > .05]). In control group, two patients claimed benign paroxysmal positional vertigo following the use of osteotomes with hand hammer. Marginal bone levels remained stable over time for both groups, and no statistically significant differences were found. After 12 months, the bone height increased in both groups and, at 24 months, was stable. Statistical analysis reported no significant differences between test and control groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrated a stable marginal bone levels over time and a significant increase in bone height between 6 and 12 months in osteotome technique. The use of electrical mallet provided some essential clinical advantages for the patients during surgical procedure in comparison with hand mallet.