# Piezoelectric and conventional rotary techniques for mandibular impacted third molar extraction: A comparative study

## TL;DR

This study compares piezoelectric and traditional rotary techniques for extracting impacted lower molars, finding that piezoelectric methods lead to better post-operative outcomes.

## Contribution

The study introduces a comparative analysis of clinical efficiency and patient outcomes between piezoelectric and conventional rotary techniques for molar extraction.

## Key findings

- Piezoelectric techniques result in reduced postoperative pain and swelling.
- Patients experience improved functional restoration with piezoelectric surgery.
- Surgical time is longer with piezoelectric methods but leads to better recovery.

## Abstract

Surgical extraction of impacted lower third molars exists as a popular operation performed on the oral cavity. Piezoelectric surgery
presents itself as an emerging minimal-invasiveness treatment option compared to traditional rotary instruments, which have been commonly
used. Therefore, it is of interest to compare the clinical efficiency, postoperative outcomes and patient satisfaction between
piezoelectric and conventional rotary techniques. The study evaluated two parameters: surgical time and postoperative pain, as measured
by VAS scores, along with swelling severity, trismus development and healing rates during a 7-day assessment period. An extended period
of surgery using piezoelectric techniques yields better post-operative outcomes than traditional rotary techniques, characterized by
reduced pain levels and swelling, as well as improved functional restoration.