Piezoelectric <scp>Hand‐Piece</scp> Versus Conventional <scp>Hand‐Piece</scp> in Third Molar Surgery: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews

ABSTRACT Background This study aimed to review the current high‐quality evidence on piezoelectric vs. conventional hand‐piece in third molar surgery: a systematic review of systematic reviews. Methods A study protocol was developed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Guideline for Overviews of Reviews (PRIOR) and registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under Registration No. CRD42024549962. Furthermore, the reporting of the present systematic review was performed based on the PRISMA checklist. Results Our search strategy yielded 1720 articles. Of these, 213 were duplicate studies, and 364 studies were screened independently reviewed by two authors for eligibility. Of these, 349 were excluded based on the title and abstract. 15 articles were assessed for eligibility, eight studies were excluded as they did not meet the inclusion criteria. Finally, a total of seven systematic reviews met the criteria for inclusion, and they were critically reviewed. Conclusions Piezoelectric hand‐pieces reduce postoperative pain, swelling, and trismus, with fewer complications like paresthesia and dry socket. Although evidence on analgesic use is mixed, they offer a better overall postoperative experience. Clinicians may favour their use in complex cases where soft tissue preservation is critical. High‐quality RCTs are needed to address current evidence heterogeneity and guide clinical practice.