Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on LinkedIn
Share by Email
Print
Compared to traditional surgical drills, piezosurgery devices reduce trauma, pain, and swelling in patients undergoing plastic surgery of the chin (genioplasty), according to new research.
Published in the Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, the report suggests that piezosurgery may be a viable alternative to traditional osteotomy technique, as it improves satisfaction and patient comfort.
TRENDING ON CPA: Rethinking Strong Opioids for Noncancer Pain
“Several studies have demonstrated that bone healing using piezosurgery is more rapid than other techniques using drills or burs, thanks to a lower inflammatory bone response,” Gilberto Sammartino, MD, of the University of Naples Federico II, Italy, and colleagues wrote.
The researchers reviewed data from 40 patients scheduled for genioplasty — either as a primary procedure or after corrective jaw surgery. Investigators then randomly assigned participants to undergo genioplasty using either ultrasonic piezosurgery instruments or traditional drills. They then compared pain, healing, and complications from 1 to 15 days after surgery.
For patients undergoing piezosurgery, pain scores were lower. There was a significant difference on the third and seventh day after surgery. Additionally, the investigators found there to be reduction in swelling in patients with piezosurgery, compared to cutting drills.
Throughout the first 15 days after surgery, both groups had a reduced feeling in the chin area. Sensation normalized within 6 months for all patients in both groups.
“Bone undergoes less stress during surgery and thus less pain and swelling posoperatively, which is in agreement with the results found in our trial: pain and discomfort were minimal compared to the traditional technique (saw and drills) especially in the immediate postoperative period of healing (within 3 days),” the authors concluded.
Reference
Rullo R, Festa V, Rullo F, et al. The Use of Piezosurgery in Genioplasty. J Craniofac Surg. 2016;27(2):414-415. doi:10.1097/scs.0000000000002473.
