• Byoung-Eun Yang and Sabine Girod.
• From the *Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Hallym University College of Medicine, Anyang, Gyounggido, Korea; and †Oral Medicine & Maxillofacial Surgery Service, Department of Surgery, Stanford School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California.
• J Craniofac Surg. 2014 Jan 1; 25 (1): 149-53.

ObjectiveThis study compared bone healing following the use of 2 piezoelectric surgery units or conventional mechanical cutting with carbide and diamond drills to explore their future applications for bone surgery.MethodsSubcritical-size (approximately 1.5-2 mm) calvarial defects were created in the parietal bones of adult mice. Following defect standardization, a full-thickness semicircular defect was created on the parietal bones of 12 mice divided into 4 groups: carbide bur, Surgystar, diamond bur, and Piezoelectric System. Hard tissue healing was assessed using micro-computed tomography at 1 day, 2 weeks, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks after surgery.ResultsAt 4 weeks, the Surgystar group and Piezoelectric System group showed a significant difference from the carbide group. The Surgystar and Piezoelectric System groups did differ from the diamond group. At 8 weeks, the Surgystar and Piezoelectric System groups differed significantly from the carbide and diamond groups. The fraction of healing results over the 8 weeks demonstrated that the Surgystar group had a significantly higher bone healing percentage than did the carbide group (P = 0.001) and the diamond group (P = 0.026), but it did not differ significantly from the Piezoelectric System group (P = 0.420).ConclusionsThe Surgystar and Piezoelectric System are suitable for bone osteotomy and provide faster bone healing in comparison with mechanical instrumentation.

19 keywords...

hide…