RA SystemsOperating SystemsUltrasonic ScalersCompressorsSuctionIntra-Oral CameraCuring LightsAutoclavesHandpiecesX-Rays

Ultrasonic Scalers > Compare Magnetostrictive vs Piezoelectric

AMDENT LOGOUltrasonic Scalers

Compare Magnetostrictive vs Piezoelectric

 

CavitronMagnetostrictive

as used by: Cavitron

US30mPiezoelectric

as used by: Amdent, EMS, Satelec

Advantages

  • Minor loss of tooth cementum
  • Smooth, hard root surfaces
  • No root planning required
  • More comfort to pateient and less wear to hard tissue than hand scaling
  • Efficient flushing of debris out of tooth pocket
  • Easy to learn and to use
  • No ergonomic operator problems
  • Time efficient when compared to hand scaling

Disadvantages

  • Restricted visibility due to water spray around the instrument tip
  • Requires water to cool magnetostrictive mechanism
  • Lacking tactility
  • Elliptical or circular tip motion resulting in 'wild' and noisy movements, causing hammering action against the tooth

Advantages

  • Minimal loss of tooth substance and smooth surfaces due to 'clean' linear tip movement
  • Vibratory pattern not altered by tooth contact, offering better tactility, lower intensity required, and less tip wear.
  • More comfortable to the patient; almost noiseless.
  • Does not stop by increased pressure
  • Better visibility due to reduced coolant requirements
  • Simple, durable, smaller sized handpiece
  • Further advantages same as listed within magnetostrictive scalers

Disadvantages

  • None reported if compared against other scaling methods or technologies
  • Disadvantages mentioned for magnetostrictive scaler not reported for Piezoelectric Scaler

 

Sources:-
Jacobson, Blomlof, Lindskog,
Parr, Green, Madsen, Miller,
Sivers, Johnson,
and others

 


Root surface texture after different scaling modalities
Subgingival scaling and root planning
Evaluation of the effect on root surfaces of ai and ultrasonic scalers