Int J Oral Implantol (Berl) 13 (2020), No. 2 18. May 2020
Int J Oral Implantol (Berl) 13 (2020), No. 2 (18.05.2020)
Page 109-121, PubMed:32424379
Piezoelectric bone surgery for lateral sinus floor elevation compared with conventional rotary instruments: A systematic review, meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis
Stacchi, Claudio / Troiano, Giuseppe / Berton, Federico / Lombardi, Teresa / Rapani, Antonio / Englaro, Andrea / Galli, Fabio / Testori, Tiziano / Nevins, Myron
Aims: To evaluate whether piezoelectric bone surgery (PBS) for lateral maxillary sinus floor elevation reduces risk of intraoperative complications, requires prolonged surgical time and improves the survival rate of dental implants in comparison with conventional rotary instruments.
Materials and methods: This meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines and was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42019122972). The PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Open Grey databases were screened for articles published from 1 January 1990 to 31 December 2018. The selection criteria included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and case-control studies (CCTs) comparing PBS with rotary instruments in lateral sinus augmentation and reporting intraoperative and postoperative outcomes (e.g. sinus membrane perforations, surgical time and implant failure rate). The risk of bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for RCTs. A meta-analysis was performed, and the power of the meta-analytic findings was assessed via trial sequential analysis (TSA).
Results: Four RCTs met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The meta-analysis showed that, although a lower incidence of membrane tearing occurred when using PBS, the difference between the two groups was not significant. However, the power of evidence for this outcome, as determined by the TSA, was weak. Moreover, there was moderate evidence suggesting that PBS prolongs the surgery duration (mean difference of 3.43 minutes), whilst insufficient data was present to assess if PBS improves the survival rate of implants inserted in augmented sinuses.
Conclusions: The power of the evidence was too weak to confirm the above-mentioned findings and further well-designed randomised clinical trials are needed to draw definitive conclusions.
Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors report no conflicts of interest related to this study. This study received no external funding.
Keywords: intraoperative complications, membrane perforation, piezosurgery, sinus floor elevation