Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences
Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences Login  | Users Online: 1226  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
    Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions | Online submission




 
 Table of Contents  
DENTAL SCIENCE - CASE REPORT
Year : 2012  |  Volume : 4  |  Issue : 6  |  Page : 165-168  

Piezosurgical osteotomy for harvesting intraoral block bone graft


Department of Periodontics, Vivekanandha Dental College for Women, Tiruchengode, Tamil Nadu, India

Date of Submission01-Dec-2011
Date of Decision02-Jan-2012
Date of Acceptance26-Jan-2012
Date of Web Publication28-Aug-2012

Correspondence Address:
Mahalingam Lakshmiganthan
Department of Periodontics, Vivekanandha Dental College for Women, Tiruchengode, Tamil Nadu
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0975-7406.100260

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 

The use of ultrasonic vibrations for the cutting of bone was first introduced two decades ago. Piezoelectric surgery is a minimally invasive technique that lessens the risk of damage to surrounding soft tissues and important structures such as nerves, vessels, and mucosa. It also reduces damage to osteocytes and permits good survival of bony cells during harvesting of bone. Grafting with intraoral bone blocks is a good way to reconstruct severe horizontal and vertical bone resorption in future implants sites. The piezosurgery system creates an effective osteotomy with minimal or no trauma to soft tissue in contrast to conventional surgical burs or saws and minimizes a patient's psychological stress and fear during osteotomy under local anesthesia. The purpose of this article is to describe the harvesting of intraoral bone blocks using the piezoelectric surgery device.

Keywords: Block bone graft, piezosurgery, ridge augmentation


How to cite this article:
Lakshmiganthan M, Gokulanathan S, Shanmugasundaram N, Daniel R, Ramesh SB. Piezosurgical osteotomy for harvesting intraoral block bone graft. J Pharm Bioall Sci 2012;4, Suppl S2:165-8

How to cite this URL:
Lakshmiganthan M, Gokulanathan S, Shanmugasundaram N, Daniel R, Ramesh SB. Piezosurgical osteotomy for harvesting intraoral block bone graft. J Pharm Bioall Sci [serial online] 2012 [cited 2019 Nov 16];4, Suppl S2:165-8. Available from: http://www.jpbsonline.org/text.asp?2012/4/6/165/100260

The periodontally compromised anterior maxilla, with its thin buccal plate, is a challenging site for restoration. The adequate volume of bone is one of the critical factors for successful osseointegration and long-term retention of endosseous dental implants. [1],[2] In such situations, osseous ridge augmentation procedures often are necessary for predictable implant therapy. [2] Autogenous bone remains the "gold standard" technique for grafting. To create the necessary osteotomy, clinicians have used variable surgical burs or saws; they cut bone very effectively, but can cause soft tissue lacerations or burns during osteotomy if the surgeon does not pay close attention. In addition, the noise and macrovibrations can cause fear and stress in patients when surgery is performed with local anesthesia. [3]

To overcome this, a novel surgical approach using piezoelectric device has been introduced in the field of periodontology and oral implantology. The purpose of this study is to describe the efficacy and safety of piezoelectric surgery during intraoral harvesting of bone blocks.


   Case Report Top


A 19-year-old female sought treatment at our department complaining of a missing right maxillary incisor. Clinical and radiological (panoramic and periapical) examinations revealed that the alveolar ridge height was normal. Ridge mapping showed only 2 mm of bucco-lingual bone (Seibert class I defect) [Figure 1] and [Figure 2]. Adequate zone of keratinized gingiva was present. Bucco-lingual atrophy of the edentulous alveolar ridge made it impossible to place an implant in this area. It was decided to augment the alveolar crest horizontally. The mandibular symphysis area was selected as the donor site for augmentation.
Figure 1: Preoperative buccal view

Click here to view
Figure 2: Preoperative occlusal view

Click here to view


Under local anesthesia, access to surgical site was obtained by crestal incision and by mesial and distal vertical releasing incision on facial side [Figure 3]. A full thickness flap was raised to expose the defect [Figure 4]. Subsequently, a monocortical autogenous bone graft was obtained from the symphysis area of the mandible by using piezosurgery unit [Figure 5] and [Figure 6]. Before placing the autogenous graft onto the missing tooth area, the recipient site was perforated to induce vascularity. Then, block bone graft was placed in the recipient site and screwed with a 9-mm titanium miniplate screw [Figure 7], and small gaps in the edge of the autogenous bone graft was also filled [Figure 8]. A tension-free suturing was done for primary closure of the elevated flap. Donor and recipient site were sutured using horizontal mattress suture with simple loop for proper closure of flap [Figure 9] and [Figure 10]. Medications prescribed for postoperative use by the patients included amoxicillin 500 mg and paracetamol 650 mg thrice a day for 5 days. Chlorhexidine mouthwash of 0.2% was prescribed for use after surgery.
Figure 3: Crestal incision with mesial and distal vertical releasing incision

Click here to view
Figure 4: After flap reflection

Click here to view
Figure 5: Harvesting of block bone graft by piezosurgery. We can see blood-free zone and good visibility

Click here to view
Figure 6: After harvesting of block bone graft

Click here to view
Figure 7: Placement of graft to recipient site with miniplating screw

Click here to view
Figure 8: Osseograft placed margins of block bone graft

Click here to view
Figure 9: Suture of recipient site

Click here to view
Figure 10: Suture of donor site

Click here to view


The patient was reviewed after a week. There was no postoperative swelling, less patient discomfort, and uneventful healing [Figure 11] and [Figure 12]. Six months postoperatively, bone mapping revealed that the patient gained bucco-lingual width of about 5 mm which was sufficient for implant placement.
Figure 11: 1-week postoperative occlusal view

Click here to view
Figure 12: 1-week postoperative buccal view

Click here to view



   Discussion Top


Compared with traditional rotary instrumentation, piezosurgery requires much less hand pressure. This results in enhanced operator sensitivity and control, indicating that the clinician can develop a better feel and precision for the cutting action because of microvibration of cutting tip. The cutting action is less invasive, producing less collateral tissue damage, which results in better healing. [4],[5] The piezosurgery system can split a very narrow ridge with minimal loss or perforation of bone. [3] Owing to its cavitation effect on physiological solutions (e.g. blood), piezosurgery creates a virtually bloodless surgical site that makes visibility in the working area much clearer than with conventional bone cutting instruments. Unlike conventional burs and micro saws, piezosurgery inserts do not become hot, which again reduces the risk of postoperative necrosis. [6] In addition, surgical access is easier in the deep oral cavity in comparison to surgical burs which use a straight handpiece. The piezosurgery device makes a precise and tactile-controlled osteotomy.

The ultrasounds of the piezosurgery unit have been developed specifically for cutting bone tissue and have the advantage of not working once they touch soft tissue (and therefore not causing any nerve damage). It can be used in sinus lift procedure to prevent Schneiderian membrane perforation. [7] High-frequency oscillations between 24,000 and 29,500 Hz, modulated with a low frequency between 10 and 60 Hz, enable efficient and controlled use and improve the healing of the tissue.

Piezoelectric surgery uses a specifically engineered surgical instrument characterized by a surgical power that is three times higher than that of normal ultrasonic instruments. This transfers a significantly higher working level ultrasound, and osteotomy can be performed even when the bone is highly mineralized. This allows the cut to be made quickly, and for this reason, excessive increases in bone temperature are impeded. Furthermore, the physiologic solution can easily cool down the bone. [7]


   Conclusion Top


Piezoelectric surgery is an innovative device for general practitioners and experienced oral surgeons for implantology, periosurgery, endodontic surgery, and oral surgery. Compared to other osteotomy instruments, the advantages of ultrasonic surgical instruments are: 1) micrometric bone cut, 2) selective cut, and 3) clear surgical field. Its microvibrations cut hard tissue with precision and accuracy. Its microvibration cuts hard tissues with precision and reduces undesired bone cutting. Insignificant noise and vibrations compared to the ones by rotary bur or saw provide better comfort to patients.

 
   References Top

1.Albrektsson T, Dahl E, Enbom L, Engevall S, Engquist B, Eriksson AR, et al. Osseointegrated oral implants: A Swedish multicenter study of 8139 consecutively inserted Nobelpharma implants. J Periodontol 1990;59:287  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.Brugnami F, Caiazzo A, Leone C. Local Intraoral Autologous Bone Harvesting for Dental Implant Treatment: Alternative Sources and Criteria of Choice. Keio J Med 2009;58:24-8.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.Sohn D-S, Ahn M-R, Lee WH, Yeo DS, Lim SY. Piezoelectric Osteotomy for Intraoral Harvesting of Bone Blocks. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2007;27:127-31.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.Aro H, Kallioniemi H, Aho AJ, Kellokumgo-Lehtinen P. Ultrasonic device in bone cutting: A histological and scanning electron microscopical study. Acta Orthop Scand 1981;52:5-10.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.Vercellotti T, Crovace A, Palermo A, Molfetta A. The piezoelectric osteotomy in orthopedics: Clinical and histological evaluations (Pilot study in animals). Mediterranean J Surg Med 2001;9:89-96.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.Horton JE, Tarpley TM Jr, Wood LD. The healing of surgical defects in alveolar bone produced with ultrasonic instrumentation, chisel and rotary bur. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1975;39:536-46.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.Vercellotti T, Paoli SD, Nevins M. The Piezoelectric Bony Window Osteotomy and Sinus Membrane Elevation: Introduction of a New Technique for Simplification of the Sinus Augmentation Procedure. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2001;21:561-7.  Back to cited text no. 7
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5], [Figure 6], [Figure 7], [Figure 8], [Figure 9], [Figure 10], [Figure 11], [Figure 12]


This article has been cited by
1 Evaluation of the Treatment Modalities for Neurosensory Disturbances of the Inferior Alveolar Nerve Following Retromolar Bone Harvesting for Bone Augmentation
Shinnosuke Nogami,Kensuke Yamauchi,Shunji Shiiba,Yoshihiro Kataoka,Bunichi Hirayama,Tetsu Takahashi
Pain Medicine. 2015; 16(3): 501
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Parametric Modeling of the Human Mandible Lateral Body for the Shape Optimization of its Section in the Case of Bone Augmentation
Suciu Mircea,Cazacu Razvan,Grigoras Radu Ionut,Bica Cristina Ioana
Procedia Technology. 2015; 19: 934
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 The effect of conventional surgery and piezoelectric surgery bone harvesting techniques on the donor site morbidity of the mandibular ramus and symphysis
N. Altiparmak,S.S. Soydan,S. Uckan
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2015; 44(9): 1131
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    Abstract
   Case Report
   Discussion
   Conclusion
    References
    Article Figures

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1794    
    Printed83    
    Emailed1    
    PDF Downloaded88    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 3    

Recommend this journal