Effects of Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy in The Maxillofacial Surgery Practice – A Systematic Review

Enes Özkan,Tuğba Haliloğlu Özkan

doi:10.31344/ijhhs.v3i4.101

Abstract

This review intends to provide researchers with a brief summary of extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT), and to bring new perspectives by systematic reviewing of the available data on the results of the various effects of ESWT regarding dentistry and the maxillofacial area. Literature search was conducted on December 2017 using the PubmedMedline, Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science databases.Articles between 1989 and 2018 were included.Search was performed using the keywords ‘alveolar, dentoalveolar, maxilla, mandibular, oral and sialolthiasis’ words in combination with ‘shock wave or shockwave’. The studies that were decided to include to this systematic review (n: 35) mostly consist of experimental and clinical studies. The current systematic review stated that ESWT has a success rate of up to 50% in the treatment of sialolithiasis. Shock wave therapy has also different dose-dependent effects on each tissue in the intraoral region. Shock wave parameters that will bring optimal biological effect to any treatment indication are yet to be clarified.International Journal of Human and Health Sciences Vol. 03 No. 04 October’19 Page : 186-195

Highlights

Over the past three decades, shock waves have been used in the noninvasive treatment of renal stones and gallstones[1]
Lateral and canine mobility were examined after shock wave therapy applied to the anterior mandibular region, and it was reported that more rapid decrease in mobility was observed in the extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT) treated group[32]
Considering the advantages of ESWT reported in the literature, its use in the treatment of different diseases and defects in the maxillofacial area has become forward and experimental applications in this area have produced successful results

Summary

Introduction

‘maxilla’, ‘mandibular’, ‘oral’, ‘sialolthiasis’, ‘shock wave therapy’, ‘shockwave therapy’. These invasive surgical procedures have risks of nerve (facial, lingual and hypoglossal) damage, skin scarring, Frey’s syndrome, and postoperative infection[14] For this reason, in the past 25 years, minimally invasive and gland-preserving treatment methods have been developed[15] including intracorporeal and extracorporeal shock wave therapy, sialendoscopy, interventional radiology, and endoscopic videoassisted transoral and transcervical stone retrieval options[13]. When the studies that fulfill the review criterias were examined, a stone-free success rate of 17100% was obtained after certain follow-up period (1 month-12 years) This rate varies depending on the number of patients included, the location of the stone, the characteristics of the device used, the shock wave parameters, and the size of the stone. There may be changes in the number of sessions, the energy intensity and frequency of shock waves according to the presence of the stone in follow-up Both piezoelectric and electromagnetic devices apply shock wave therapy at an average frequency of 2-2.5 Hz (Table 1). Supporting the importance of the optimal dose shock wave view, Onger et al revealed that repetition of the 1000 impulses accelerated the consolidation, while 500 impulses extended that period[6] (Table 2)

Mandibular Defect Healing

Findings

Conclusions