What is it about?
A total of 46 split crest procedures were performed in partially edentulous patients. 23 of them with electrical mallet while the hand mallet was used for the other 23. Split length and width were measured with a periodontal probe before and after procedure. Implant fixtures were than immediately placed in the sites. Follow up was set to be at 6, 12, 24 months
Featured Image
Why is it important?
No statistically significant difference were found in both groups according to ridge width (average 7,2 mm) and incision length (average 17,5 mm). Survival rate at 2 years was 98,31% with only 2 implants lost
Perspectives
Although no difference was found in treated sites, the electrical mallet does have some clinical advantages compared to the hand mallet. At the same time, the study showed how the operator skills do not differ depending on the type of device used for the surgery
Dr Paolo Capparé
IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital and Vita-Salute University, Milan
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Electrical mallet provides essential advantages in split-crest and immediate implant placement, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, January 2013, Springer Science + Business Media,
DOI: 10.1007/s10006-013-0389-2.
You can read the full text:
Resources
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
