EVALUATION OF THE USE OF MAGNETIC MALLET FOR DELAYED IMPLANT PLACEMENT IN POSTERIOR MANDIBLE (RANDOMIZED CONTROLED CLINICAL TRIAL)

moataz fawzi abdelaziz, S. Osman, Mohamed Shokry
{"title":"EVALUATION OF THE USE OF MAGNETIC MALLET FOR DELAYED IMPLANT PLACEMENT IN POSTERIOR MANDIBLE (RANDOMIZED CONTROLED CLINICAL TRIAL)","authors":"moataz fawzi abdelaziz, S. Osman, Mohamed Shokry","doi":"10.21608/adjalexu.2024.251045.1450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND: Instead of using drills for implant bone site preparation, new tools have been developed to decrease surgical stress, gain more control over the incision, boost primary stability, and shorten recovery and morbidity periods. A novel apparatus that utilises magneto-dynamic technology has been suggested for use in bone surgical procedures, such as the preparation of dental implant sites. AIM OF THE STUDY: Evaluation of the use of magnetic mallet versus conventional drill system for delayed implant placement in posterior mandible. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized, controlled, clinical trial was carried out in patients requiring dental implants to replace their extracted tooth in posterior mandible. Patients who met the inclusion criteria was randomly divided in to two groups: study group (osteotomy with magnetic mallet) and controlled group (osteotomy with conventional drill system) and this was clinically evaluated (primary and secondary stability evaluation ) and radiographically evaluated (bone density evaluation). RESULTS: Implants done with magnetic mallet had a statistically significant higher primary stability than Implants done with drill system and Secondary stability was statistically significant higher in study group than Implants done in control group while Both methods are comparable regarding the bone density . CONCLUSION: Magnetic mallet show better significant primary stability, and secondary stability than the conventional drill system. Both methods are comparable regarding the bone density. RUNNING TITLE:","PeriodicalId":7723,"journal":{"name":"Alexandria Dental Journal","volume":"8 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alexandria Dental Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/adjalexu.2024.251045.1450","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Instead of using drills for implant bone site preparation, new tools have been developed to decrease surgical stress, gain more control over the incision, boost primary stability, and shorten recovery and morbidity periods. A novel apparatus that utilises magneto-dynamic technology has been suggested for use in bone surgical procedures, such as the preparation of dental implant sites. AIM OF THE STUDY: Evaluation of the use of magnetic mallet versus conventional drill system for delayed implant placement in posterior mandible. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized, controlled, clinical trial was carried out in patients requiring dental implants to replace their extracted tooth in posterior mandible. Patients who met the inclusion criteria was randomly divided in to two groups: study group (osteotomy with magnetic mallet) and controlled group (osteotomy with conventional drill system) and this was clinically evaluated (primary and secondary stability evaluation ) and radiographically evaluated (bone density evaluation). RESULTS: Implants done with magnetic mallet had a statistically significant higher primary stability than Implants done with drill system and Secondary stability was statistically significant higher in study group than Implants done in control group while Both methods are comparable regarding the bone density . CONCLUSION: Magnetic mallet show better significant primary stability, and secondary stability than the conventional drill system. Both methods are comparable regarding the bone density. RUNNING TITLE:
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估在下颌后部延迟植入种植体时使用磁力棒的情况(随机对照临床试验)
背景:为了减少手术压力、更好地控制切口、提高初期稳定性、缩短恢复期和发病率,人们开发了新的工具,而不是使用钻头来准备种植骨部位。一种利用磁动力技术的新型器械已被推荐用于骨外科手术,如牙科植入部位的准备。研究目的:评估在下颌后部延迟植入种植体时使用磁力锤和传统钻系统的效果。材料与方法:对需要种植牙替换下颌后部拔牙的患者进行随机对照临床试验。符合纳入标准的患者被随机分为两组:研究组(使用磁槌进行截骨)和对照组(使用传统钻头系统进行截骨),并进行临床评估(主要和次要稳定性评估)和影像学评估(骨密度评估)。结果:使用磁槌植入的假体在统计学上显著高于使用钻孔系统植入的假体,研究组的假体在统计学上显著高于对照组的假体,而这两种方法在骨密度方面具有可比性。结论:与传统的钻孔系统相比,磁槌显示出更好的主要稳定性和次要稳定性。两种方法的骨密度相当。运行标题:
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Microleakage Assessment Using Different Composite Application Techniques in Primary Molars. An In-Vitro Comparative Study “THERAPEUTIC EFFECT OF FLAXSEEDS ON OSTEOPOROSIS IN ALVEOLAR BONE OF RATS” EVALUATION OF BONE HEALING BY MESENCHYMAL STEM CELLS IN RABBITS (AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY) EVALUATION OF THE STABILITY OF IMMEDIATE IMPLANT PLACEMENT IN MANDIBULAR MOLAR INTER-RADICULAR SEPTUM USING OSSEODENSIFICATION TECHNIQUE (CLINICAL TRIAL) KIAA0101 IMMUNOHISTOCHEMICAL EXPRESSION IN DIAGNOSTIC DILEMMA BETWEEN AMELOBLASTOMA AND AMELOBLASTIC CARCINOMA (IN VITRO STUDY)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1