A comparative study of the intraoperative and postoperative response of electric dental handpieces and turbo-pneumatic dental handpieces after mandibular third molar extraction

doi:10.19438/j.cjoms.2024.05.005

Abstract

Abstract: PURPOSE: To compare the differences in intraoperative and postoperative response between electric dental handpieces and pneumatic turbine handpieces in the extraction of impacted mandibular third molars. METHODS: Using a randomized grouped self-crossover control design method, 50 patients who underwent extraction of bilateral mandibular proximal-medial impacted wisdom teeth were selected, and the right and left mandibular impacted wisdom teeth were extracted with dental electric handpieces and pneumatic turbine handpieces, respectively. Intraoperative surgery time, pain degree, and complication rate were collected, and postoperative pain level, swelling level, and mouth opening restriction were recorded on the 1st, 3rd, and 7th days after extraction, and the data of the two groups were compared. SPSS 19.0 software package was used for data analysis. RESULTS: Compared with the turbo-pneumatic dental handpieces group, the electric dental handpieces group had no significant difference in operation time and postoperative complications, but with significant advantages in reducing postoperative pain, postoperative swelling reaction, and accelerating the recovery of patients' mouth opening. CONCLUSIONS: Electric dental handpieces has more advantages than turbo-pneumatic dental handpieces in the extraction of mandibular impacted wisdom teeth, which is worthy of clinical application.

Key words: Electric dental handpieces, Turbo-pneumatic dental handpieces, Impacted third molar, Tooth extractions

CLC Number:

R782.11

ZHANG Hong-yu, SU Li-wen, SUN Huan, WU Yang. A comparative study of the intraoperative and postoperative response of electric dental handpieces and turbo-pneumatic dental handpieces after mandibular third molar extraction[J]. China Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2024, 22(5): 440-445.

References

[1] Kenyon BJ, Van Zyl I, Louie KG.Comparison of cavity preparation quality using an electric motor handpiece and an air turbine dental handpiece[J]. J Am Dent Assoc, 2005, 136(8): 1101-1105.
[2] Ercoli C, Rotella M, Funkenbusch PD, et al.In vitro comparison of the cutting efficiency and temperature production of ten different rotary cutting instruments. part Ⅱ: electric handpiece and comparison with turbine[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2009, 101(5): 319-331.
[3] Choi C, Driscoll CF, Romberg E.Comparison of cutting efficiencies between electric and air-turbine dental handpieces[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2010, 103(2): 101-107.
[4] Rotella M, Ercoli C, Funkenbusch PD, et al.Performance of single-use and multiuse diamond rotary cutting instruments with turbine and electric handpieces[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2014, 111(1): 56-63.
[5] Funkenbusch PD, Rotella M, Chochlidakis K, et al.Multivariate evaluation of the cutting performance of rotary instruments with electric and air-turbine handpieces[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2016, 116(4): 558-563.
[6] Ricci ML, Fontana S, Pinci F, et al.Pneumonia associated with a dental unit waterline[J]. Lancet, 2012, 379(9816): 684.
[7] Schönning C, Jernberg C, Klingenberg D, et al.Legionellosis acquired through a dental unit: a case study[J]. J Hosp infect, 2017, 96(1): 89-92.
[8] Hall DL.Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and infection control for restorative dental treatment in nursing homes[J]. Spec Care Dentist, 2003, 23(3): 100-107.
[9] Eikenberg SL.Comparison of the cutting efficiencies of electric motor and air turbine dental handpieces[J]. Gen Dent, 2001, 49(2): 199-204.
[10] Pei DD, Meng YC, Fayed AS, et al.Comparison of crown fit and operator preferences between tooth preparation with electric and air-turbine handpieces[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2021, 125(1): 111-116.
[11] Campbell SC.Are friends electric?: a review of the electric handpiece in clinical dental practice[J]. Dent Update, 2013, 40(3): 194-196.
[12] Song XF, Peng JH, Yin L, et al.A machining science approach to dental cutting of glass ceramics using an electric handpiece and diamond burs[J]. J Manuf Sci Eng, 2013, 135(1): 011014.
[13] Poole RL, Lea SC, Dyson JE, et al.Vibration characteristics of dental high-speed turbines and speed-increasing handpieces[J]. J Dent, 2008, 36(7): 488-493.
[14] 纪学悦,费春楠,沈芃, 等.诊疗之间冲洗对口腔综合治疗台水路污染影响的研究[J].中国消毒学杂志, 2015, 32(3): 225-227.
Ji XF, Fei CN, Shen P, et al.Reaearch on the effect of flushing dental unit waterline between treatments on the bacterial load of dental unit water[J]. Chinese Journal of Disinfection, 2015, 32(3): 225-227.
[15] Costa D, Mercier A, Gravouil K, et al.Pyrosequencing analysis of bacterial diversity in dental unit waterlines[J].Water Res, 2015, 15(81): 223-231.
[16] Wirthlin MR, Roth M.Dental unit waterline contamination:a review of research and findings from a clinic setting[J]. Compend Contin Educ Dent, 2015, 36(3): 216-219.
[17] Szymanska J, Sitkowska J.Opportunistic bacteria in dental unit waterlines: assessment and characteristics[J]. Future Microbiol, 2013, 8(5): 681-689.
[18] 苏静. 口腔综合治疗台水路管理的现状与思考[J].中国实用口腔科杂志, 2018, 11(12): 713-717.
Su J.Current status and thoughts on the management of dental unit water lines[J]. Chinese Journal of Practical Stomatology, 2018, 11(12): 713-717.
[19] T/WSJD 40-2023, 口腔综合治疗台水路清洗消毒技术规范[S]. T/WSJD 40-2023, Dental unit water lines cleaning and disinfection technical specifications[S].
[20] Ohta K, Yoshimura H, Ryoke T, et al.Investigation of the electric handpiece-related pneumomediastinum and cervicofacial subcutaneous emphysema in third molar surgery[J]. J Hard Tissue Biol, 2019, 28(1): 79-86.
[21] Robles-Moreno M, Sananez AJ, Mettenburg DJ, et al.Hand fatigue differences between air driven and electric handpieces[J]. J Dent Res, 2020 (99A): 1362.
[22] Kazen DH. Modern electric handpieces feature improved benefits for today's dental surgeon[J]. Dent Assist, 2005, 74(1): 16, 25.