Version 1
: Received: 24 July 2024 / Approved: 25 July 2024 / Online: 26 July 2024 (11:39:39 CEST)
How to cite:
Baldi, D.; Baldi, F.; Giordano, F.; De Giorgis, L.; Bagnasco, F.; Lugas, A. T.; Menini, M.; Colombo, J. Usefulness of Magnetodynamic Mallet in Tooth Extraction. Preprints2024, 2024072064. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202407.2064.v1
Baldi, D.; Baldi, F.; Giordano, F.; De Giorgis, L.; Bagnasco, F.; Lugas, A. T.; Menini, M.; Colombo, J. Usefulness of Magnetodynamic Mallet in Tooth Extraction. Preprints 2024, 2024072064. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202407.2064.v1
Baldi, D.; Baldi, F.; Giordano, F.; De Giorgis, L.; Bagnasco, F.; Lugas, A. T.; Menini, M.; Colombo, J. Usefulness of Magnetodynamic Mallet in Tooth Extraction. Preprints2024, 2024072064. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202407.2064.v1
APA Style
Baldi, D., Baldi, F., Giordano, F., De Giorgis, L., Bagnasco, F., Lugas, A. T., Menini, M., & Colombo, J. (2024). Usefulness of Magnetodynamic Mallet in Tooth Extraction. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202407.2064.v1
Chicago/Turabian Style
Baldi, D., Maria Menini and Jacopo Colombo. 2024 "Usefulness of Magnetodynamic Mallet in Tooth Extraction" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202407.2064.v1
Abstract
Tooth extraction techniques have been refined over the years in order to be less traumatic and better preserve alveolar bone. A recently introduced extraction method involves the use of the Magnetic Mallet®, which
allows the clinician to be more precise, faster and less traumatic. The aim of the present study was to clinically evaluate whether extractions performed by means of the Magnetic Mallet® can lead to less bucco-lingual bone resorption.
Between February 2023 and June 2023, 9 patients with an average age of 62 years underwent 29 extractions using the Magnetic Mallet®. Sectoral CBCTs were performed in order to measure bucco-lingual bone thickness at time 0 (T0, before extraction) and 3 months after extraction (T3M). All the extractions were performed by 2 different expert operators using exclusively the magnetic mallet.
For statistical analysis, a two-sample t-test was performed between the measurements taken at T0 and those taken at T3M in the 29 dental elements and between the difference in bone loss among the 2 different clinicians. 22 teeth were extracted in the upper jaw and 7 in the lower jaw. The average degree of mobility was 1. The average degree of force impressed by the instrument to extract the teeth was 2, while the average frequency of blows administered was 7. The average time taken for the extractions was 3½ minutes. After 4 months, the mean bucco-lingual bone resorption was 1.54 mm (SD: +-). The difference of bucco-lingual bone thickness between T0 and T3 was significant at an alpha significance level of 0.01. No difference were found in bone resorption based on the clinician.
The use of the Magnetic Mallet® during tooth extraction led to less bucco-lingual bone resorption in the 3 months following dental extraction, compared to the traditional use of manual hammers, chisels and levers.
Keywords
tooth extraction; socket preservation; magnetodynamic surgery; oral surgery
Subject
Medicine and Pharmacology, Dentistry and Oral Surgery
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
