Open Access
Educational Article
Issue
J Oral Med Oral Surg
Volume 28, Number 1, 2022
Article Number 2
Number of page(s) 6
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/mbcb/2021029
Published online 15 December 2021
  1. Pavlıkova G, Foltan R, Horka M, Hanzelka T, Borunska H, Sedy J. Piezosurgery in oral and maxillofacial surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011;40:451–457. [Google Scholar]
  2. Labanca M, Azzola F, Vinci R, Rodella LF. Piezoelectric surgery: Twenty years of use. British J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008;46:265–269. [Google Scholar]
  3. Gleizal A, Bera JC, Lavandier B, Beziat JL. Craniofacial approach for orbital tumors and ultrasonic bone cutting. J Fr Ophtalmol 2007;30:882–891. [Google Scholar]
  4. Schlee M, Steigmann M, Bratu E, Garg AK. Piezosurgery: basics and possibilities. Impl Dent 2006;15:334–337. [Google Scholar]
  5. Stubinger S, Robertson A, Zimmerer KS, Leiggener C, Sader R, Kunz C. Piezoelectiric harvesting of an autogenous bone graft from the zygomaticomaxillary region: case report. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2006;26:453–7. [Google Scholar]
  6. Preti G, Martinasso G, Peirone B, et al. Cytokines and growth factors involved in the osseointegration of oral titanium implants positioned using piezoelectric bone surgery versus a drill technique: a pilot study in minipigs. J Periodontol 2007;78:716–22. [Google Scholar]
  7. Sohn DS, Lee JS, An K-M, Choi B-J. Piezoelectric Internal Sinus Elevation (PISE) Technique: A New Method for Internal Sinus Elevation. Implant dentistry 2009;18. [Google Scholar]
  8. Wallace SS, Mazor Z, Froum SJ, Cho SC, Tarnow DP. Schneiderian membrane perforation rate during sinus elevation using piezosurgery: clinical results of 100 consecutive cases. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2007;27:413–419. [Google Scholar]
  9. Vercellotti T, De Paoli S, 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;21:561–567. [Google Scholar]
  10. Arakji H, Shokry M, Aboelsaad N. Comparison of piezosurgery and conventional rotary instruments for removal of impacted mandibular third molars: a randomized controlled clinical and radiographic trial. Int J Dent 2016;8169356. [Google Scholar]
  11. Al-Moraissi EA, Elmansi YA, Al-Sharaee YA, Alrmali AE, Alkhutari AS. Does the piezoelectric surgical technique produce fewer postoperative sequelae after lower third molar surgery than conventional rotary instruments? A systematic review and meta analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;45:383–391. [Google Scholar]
  12. Goyal M, Marya K, Jhamb A, Chawla S, Sonoo PR, Singh V, Aggarwal A. Comparative evaluation of surgical outcome after removal of impacted mandibular third molars using a Piezotome or a conventional handpiece: a prospective study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;50:556–561. [Google Scholar]
  13. Barone A, Marconcini S, Giacomelli L, Rispoli L, Calvo JL, Covani U. A randomized clinical evaluation of ultrasound bone surgery versus traditional rotary instruments in lower third molar extraction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;68:330–336. [Google Scholar]
  14. Menziletoglu D, Basturk F, Isik BK, Essen A. A prospective split-mouth clinical study: comparison of piezosurgery and conventional rotary instruments in impacted third molar surgery. Oral and maxillofacial surgery 2016. doi.org/10.1007/s10006-019-00817-7. [Google Scholar]
  15. Schlegel KA, Fichtner G, Schultze-Mosgau S, et al. Histologic findings in sinus augmentation with autogenous bone chips versus a bovine bone substitute. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:53–58. [Google Scholar]
  16. Artzi Z, Kozlovsky A, Nemcovsky CE, et al. The amount of newly formed bone in sinus grafting procedures depends on tissue depth as well as the type and residual amount of the grafted material. J Clin Periodontol 2005;32:193–199. [Google Scholar]
  17. Berengo M, Bacci C, Sartori M, Perini A, Della Barbera M, Valente M. Histomorphometric evaluation of bone grafts harvested by different methods. Minerva Stomatol 2006;55:189–198. [Google Scholar]
  18. Galié M, Candotto V, Elia G, Clauser LC. Piezosurgery: A new and safe technique for distraction osteogenesis in Pierre Robin sequence review of the literature and case report. Int J Surg Case Rep 2015;6:269–272. [Google Scholar]
  19. Wei W-B, Chen M-J, Yang C, Zhang W, Wang Y. Decompression of the inferior alveolar nerve to treat the pain of the mandible caused by fibrous dysplasia-case report. Int J Clin Exp Med 2015;8:19535–19539. [Google Scholar]
  20. Abella F, de Ribot J, Doria G, Duran-Sindreu F, Roig M. Applications of piezoelectric surgery in endodontic surgery: a literature review. J Endod 2014 Mar;40:325–32. [Google Scholar]
  21. Stübinger S, Stricker A, Berg BI. Piezosurgery in implant dentistry. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2015 Nov 11;7:115–24. [Google Scholar]
  22. da Silva Neto UT, Joly JC, Gehrke SA. Clinical analysis of the stability of dental implants after preparation of the site by conventional drilling or piezosurgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014;52:149–153. [Google Scholar]
  23. Noetzel N, Fienitz T, Kreppel M, Zirk M, Safi AF, Rothamel D. Osteotomy speed, heat development, and bone structure influence by various piezoelectric systems-an in vitro study. Clin Oral Investig 2019 Nov;23:4029–4041. [Google Scholar]
  24. Ueki K, Nakagawa K, Marukawa K, Yamamoto E. Le Fort I osteotomy using an ultrasonic bone curette to fracture the pterygoid plates. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2004;32:381–6. [Google Scholar]
  25. Landes CA, Stubinger S, Ballon A, Sader R. Piezo osteotomy in orthognathic surgery versus conventional saw and chisel osteotomy. Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008;12:139–147. [Google Scholar]
  26. Geha HJ, Gleizal AM, Nimeskern NJ, Beziat JL. Sensitivity of the inferior lip and chin following mandibular bilateral sagittal split osteotomy using piezosurgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006;118:1598–1607. [Google Scholar]
  27. Eggers G, Klein J, Blank J, Hassfeld S. Piezosurgery: an ultrasound device for cutting bone and its use and limitations in maxillofacial surgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004;42:451–453. [Google Scholar]
  28. Crosetti E, Battiston B, Succo G. Piezosurgery in head and neck oncological and reconstructive surgery: personal experience on 127 cases. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 2009;29:1–9. [Google Scholar]
  29. Bilimoria, R, Young H, Patel D, Kwok J. The role of piezoelectric surgery and platelet-rich fibrin in treatment of ORN and MRONJ: A clinical case series. Oral Surgery 2017;11:136–143. [Google Scholar]
  30. Yoshimura H, Ohba S, Aiki M, Nagase J, Kimura T, Kobayashi J, Ishimaru K, Matsuda S, Sano K. Piezosurgery-assisted transposition of the inferior alveolar nerve in a patient with osteoradionecrosis: A case report with a neurosensory assessment and a review of the literature. J Oral Maxillofac Surg Medicine Pathology 2014;26:472–476. [Google Scholar]
  31. Sakkas N, Otten JE, Gutwald R, Schmelzeisen R. Transposition of the mental nerve by piezosurgery followed by postoperative neurosensory control: a case report. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008;46:270–271. [Google Scholar]
  32. Robiony M, Polini F, Costa F, Zerman N, Politi M. Ultrasonic bone cutting for surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion (SARME) under local anaesthesia. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surge 2007;36:267–269. [Google Scholar]
  33. Gonzalez-Lagunas J. Is the piezoelectric device the new standard for facial osteotomies? J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg 2017 Sep;118:255–258. [Google Scholar]
  34. Gonzalez Lagunas J, Mareque J, Raspall G. Piezosugery its role in TMJ surgery. J Craniomaxfac Surg 2006;34:220 [Google Scholar]
  35. Salami A, Dellepiane M, Salzano FA, Mora R. Piezosurgery in endoscopic dacryocystorhinostomy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009;140:264–266. [Google Scholar]
  36. Vercellotti T. Technological characteristics and clinical indications of piezoelectric bone surgery. Minerva Stomatol 2004;53:207. [Google Scholar]
  37. Beziat JL, Vercellotti T, Gleizal A. What is Piezosurgery? Two-years experience in craniomaxillofacial surgery. Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac 2007;108:101–107. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.