<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/rdf/" xmlns:ow="http://www.ontoweb.org/ontology/1#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:ds="http://dspace.org/ds/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:doc="http://www.lyncode.com/xoai" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/rdf/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/rdf.xsd">
   <ow:Publication rdf:about="oai:digibug.ugr.es:10481/67936">
      <dc:title>Stability and marginal bone loss in implants placed using piezoelectric osteotomy versus conventional drilling: systematic review and meta-analysis</dc:title>
      <dc:creator>Godoy Reina, Isabel</dc:creator>
      <dc:creator>Moreu Burgos, Gerardo</dc:creator>
      <dc:creator>González-Jaranay Ruiz, Maximino M.</dc:creator>
      <dc:subject>Piezosurgery</dc:subject>
      <dc:subject>Piezoelectric surgery</dc:subject>
      <dc:subject>Conventional drill</dc:subject>
      <dc:subject>Implant site preparation</dc:subject>
      <dc:subject>Dental implants</dc:subject>
      <dc:subject>Implant stability</dc:subject>
      <dc:subject>Marginal bone loss</dc:subject>
      <dc:description>Background: The main objective of this systematic review was to compare primary and secondary implant stability&#xd;
between placement with piezoelectric osteotomy and conventional drilling, comparing marginal bone losses&#xd;
as a secondary objective.&#xd;
Material and Methods: An electronic search was conducted using PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, and Cochrane&#xd;
Library (Wiley) databases, besides a manual search.&#xd;
Results: A total of 153 articles were retrieved, 39 from Pubmed, 44 from Scopus, and 70 from the Cochrane&#xd;
Library. After removing duplicates, 112 articles (1 from the manual search) were screened, and 9 were finally&#xd;
selected for qualitative and statistical analyses.&#xd;
Conclusions: Piezoelectric surgery is a predictable alternative to conventional drilling for dental implant placement.&#xd;
Medium/long-term survival rates and marginal bone losses are similar between piezoelectric osteotomy and&#xd;
conventional drilling, and there is no difference in ISQ values for primary stability. However, implants placed with&#xd;
ultrasound showed a lower decrease in implant stability quotient (ISQ) during the osseointegration period and a&#xd;
higher ISQ value for secondary stability. This study contributes further information on peri-implant bone tissue&#xd;
at 3 and 6 months after implant placement with piezoelectric osteotomy or conventional drilling and provides an&#xd;
updated meta-analysis of comparative studies.</dc:description>
      <dc:date>2021-04-14T07:01:59Z</dc:date>
      <dc:date>2021-04-14T07:01:59Z</dc:date>
      <dc:date>2021-03</dc:date>
      <dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
      <dc:identifier>Godoy-Reina I, Moreu-Burgos G, González-Jaranay M. Stability and marginal bone loss in implants placed using piezoelectric osteotomy versus conventional drilling: systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2021 Mar 1;26 (2):e226-37. [doi:10.4317/medoral.24146]</dc:identifier>
      <dc:identifier>http://hdl.handle.net/10481/67936</dc:identifier>
      <dc:identifier>10.4317/medoral.24146</dc:identifier>
      <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
      <dc:rights>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/</dc:rights>
      <dc:rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dc:rights>
      <dc:rights>Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España</dc:rights>
      <dc:publisher>Medicina Oral SL</dc:publisher>
   </ow:Publication>
</rdf:RDF>