Comparative evaluation of morphological and chemical characteristics of bone after performing osteotomy with a piezoelectric device, hard tissue laser, and low-speed handpiece

Authors

  • Vignesh Krishnaswamy Department of Periodontology, Vinayaka Mission’s Sankarachariyar Dental College, Vinayaka Mission’s Research Foundation (Deemed to be University), Salem, Tamil Nadu, India https://orcid.org/0009-0000-1287-4440
  • Jayachandran Dorairaj Department of Periodontology, Vinayaka Mission’s Sankarachariyar Dental College, Vinayaka Mission’s Research Foundation (Deemed to be University), Salem, Tamil Nadu, India https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6892-0493
  • Srilekha Gunasekaran Department of Periodontology, Vinayaka Mission’s Sankarachariyar Dental College, Vinayaka Mission’s Research Foundation (Deemed to be University), Salem, Tamil Nadu, India https://orcid.org/0009-0002-0736-0124
  • Sayee Ganesh Department of Periodontology, Vinayaka Mission’s Sankarachariyar Dental College, Vinayaka Mission’s Research Foundation (Deemed to be University), Salem, Tamil Nadu, India https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8464-7650
  • Priya Kesavan Department of Periodontology, Vinayaka Mission’s Sankarachariyar Dental College, Vinayaka Mission’s Research Foundation (Deemed to be University), Salem, Tamil Nadu, India https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7152-9871
  • Kurinchichelvan Ramalingam Department of Periodontology, Indira Gandhi Institute of Dental Sciences, Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University), Puducherry, India https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7443-101X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15584/ejcem.2025.1.11

Keywords:

hard tissue laser, osteotomy, piezoelectric device

Abstract

Introduction and aim. Osteotomy procedures play a crucial role in achieving the desired osseous contour and elimination of the pocket. Traditional instruments such as chisels, files, and rotating burs have limitations including heat generation and tissue dam age. Novel instruments like piezoelectric and hard tissue lasers offer potential advantages in terms of precision and reduced tissue trauma. The aim of this study was to compare the chemical and morphological characteristics of bone surfaces after osteotomy procedures performed with three different instruments: piezoelectric, hard tissue laser, and low-speed handpiece.

Material and methods. Fifteen fresh cadaver bone specimens were randomly assigned to three groups: group A (piezoelectric), group B (hard tissue laser) and group C (low-speed handpiece). Osteotomy procedures were performed according to standard ized protocols. The specimens were determined under an energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy. Results. Analysis of morphological and chemical characteristics revealed significant differences in bone surface characteristics between groups. Groups A and B exhibited the smoothest surface with minimal tissue damage and microfractures. Group C showed the roughest surface with prominent microfractures and tissue damage.

Conclusion. Hard tissue laser and piezosurgery have shown better results due to greater precision as they preserved the bone mor phology, with less microfracture and chemical demineralization after osteotomy preparation compared with low-speed handpiece.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Sivolella S, Berengo M, Bressan E, Di Fiore A, Stellini E. Osteoblast-like cell behavior on granules of bioactive glass coated with poly-D, L-lactide and poly-D, L-lactide-polyethylene glycol copolymers. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2008;85(4):829-836.

Strbac GD, Giannis K, Unger E, Watzek G, Zechner W. Heat generation during different ultrasonic and conventional osteotomy techniques: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2014;25(4):512-521.

Eriksson AR, Albrektsson T. Temperature threshold levels for heat-induced bone tissue injury: A vital-microscopic study in the rabbit. J Prosthet Dent. 1983;50(1):101-107.

Schiegnitz E, Al-Nawas B. Narrow-diameter implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 2018;45(S20).

Giannobile WV, Lang NP, Tonetti MS. Vertical and horizontal ridge augmentation: a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol. 2010;37(11):203-210.

Misch CE, Qu Z, Bidez MW. Mechanical properties of trabecular bone in the human mandible: implications for dental implant treatment planning and surgical placement. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1999;57(6):700-706.

Nkenke E, Neukam FW. Autogenous bone harvesting and grafting in advanced jaw resorption: morbidity, resorption and implant survival. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2014;7(2).

Stübinger S, von Rechenberg B. Piezoelectric bone surgery: a review of the literature. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;71(11):2147-2153.

Landes CA, Ballon A, Roth C. Intraoral defect augmentation using piezosurgical split bone technique: clinical and histological long-term results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;37(4):379-387.

Kim DM, Nevins ML. The use of piezosurgery to minimize trauma and post-operative complications of intraoral donor harvesting. Dent Implantol Update. 2007;18(12):89-95.

de Oliveira GJP, Marques JL. Comparative analysis of bone healing after osteotomy using piezosurgery, Er laser, and a conventional rotatory system in rabbits. Lasers Med Sci. 2020;35:531-540.

Khoshzaban A, Massoumi H, Seyyed S. Evaluation of bone healing following osteotomy with Er,Cr laser compared to conventional bur: an experimental study in rabbits. J Lasers Med Sci. 2015;6(3):106-112.

Kara C, Acar AH. Comparison of Er,Cr laser and conventional surgery in impacted tooth surgery. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;42(6):695-698.

Schenk RK, Willenegger H. Morphological aspects of the healing of human diaphyseal fractures. Helv Chir Acta. 1963;29(2):155-168.

Schwarz F, Becker J, Herten M. Histological evaluation of different laser devices (Er, CO2, and GaAlAs) for oral soft tissue surgery. J Clin Periodontol. 2007;34(8):634-640.

Goldstein JI, Newbury DE, Michael JR, Ritchie NWM, Scott JHJ, Joy DC. Scanning Electron Microscopy and X-ray Microanalysis. 4th ed. Springer; 2017. doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-6676-9.

Bai X, Sandukas S, Lippert F. Assessing the morphology and elemental composition of demineralized enamel by SEM and EDS. Scanning. 2019;2019:3272046. doi: 10.1155/2019/3272046

Sasaki KM, Aoki A, Ichinose S, Yoshino T, Yamada S, Ishikawa I. Scanning Electron Microscopy and Fourier Transformed Infrared Spectroscopy Analysis of Bone Removal Using Er:YAG and CO 2 Lasers. J Periodontol. 2002;73(6):643-652. doi: 10.1902/jop.2002.73.6.643

Keller U, Raimund Hibst. Experimental studies of the application of the Er:YAG laser on dental hard substances: II. Lasers Surg Med. 1989;9(4):345-351. doi: 10.1002/lsm.1900090406

Hibst R, Keller U. Experimental studies of the application of the Er:YAG laser on dental hard substances: I. Measurement of the ablation rate. Lasers Surg Med. 1989;9(4):338-344. doi: 10.1002/lsm.1900090405

Chiriac G, Herten M, Schwarz FJ, Rothamel D, Becker JA. Autogenous bone chips: influence of a new piezoelectric device (Piezosurgery R) on chip morphology, cell viability and differentiation. J Clin Periodontol. 2005;32(9):994-999. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.2005.00809.x

Panduric DG, Juric IB, Music S, Molčanov K, Sušic M, Anic I. Morphological and ultrastructural comparative analysis of bone tissue after Er:YAG laser and surgical drill osteotomy. Photomed Laser Surg. 2014 Jul;32(7):401-408. doi: 10.1089/pho.2014.3711

Esteves JC, Marcantonio Jr E, de Souza Faloni AP, et al. Dynamics of bone healing after osteotomy with Piezosurgery or conventional drilling– histomorphometrical, immunohistochemical, and molecular analysis. J Trans Med. 2013;11(1). doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-11-221

Vercellotti T, Nevins ML, Kim DM, et al. Osseous response following resective therapy with Piezosurgery. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2005;25(6):543-549.

Ercoli C, Funkenbusch PD, Lee HJ, Moss ME, Graser GN. The influence of drill wear on cutting efficiency and heat production during osteotomy preparation for dental implants: a study of drill durability. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19(3):335-349.

Rashad A, Schwan S, Alireza Nasirpour, et al. Bone Micromorphology and Material Attrition After Sonic, Ultrasonic and Conventional Osteotomies. In Vivo. 2021;35(3):1499-1506. doi: 10.21873/invivo.12402

Downloads

Published

2025-03-30

How to Cite

Krishnaswamy, V., Dorairaj, J., Gunasekaran, S., Ganesh, S., Kesavan, P., & Ramalingam, K. (2025). Comparative evaluation of morphological and chemical characteristics of bone after performing osteotomy with a piezoelectric device, hard tissue laser, and low-speed handpiece. European Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, 23(1), 70–75. https://doi.org/10.15584/ejcem.2025.1.11

Issue

Vol. 23 No. 1 (2025)

Section

ORIGINAL PAPERS

License

Copyright (c) 2025 European Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition: this means that articles have free availability on the public Internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from having access to the Internet itself.

All articles are published with free open access under the CC-BY Creative Commons attribution license (the current version is CC-BY, version 4.0). If you submit your paper for publication by the Eur J Clin Exp Med, you agree to have the CC-BY license applied to your work. Under this Open Access license, you, as the author, agree that anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted provided that the original published version is cited. This facilitates freedom in re-use and also ensures that Eur J Clin Exp Med content can be mined without barriers for the research needs.