Articles Vol. 67 No. English Version No 1, 2026 02/06/2026

MAGNETIC MALLET TECHNOLOGY IN COMPREHENSIVE REHABILITATION OF POSTERIOR MAXILLARY DEFECTS: A CASE REPORT

Nguyen Minh Tuan1, Dang Tuan Anh2
1 Faculty of Dentistry, Haiphong University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vietnam
2 Department of Odonto-Stomatology, Haiphong Medical University Hospital, Vietnam
DOI: 10.52163/yhc.v67iE1.5224
14 Views
0 Downloads
Keywords
Sinus floor elevation, dental implant, magnetic mallet, PRF, posterior maxilla, osseodensification.
Abstract

Introduction: Rehabilitation of the atrophic posterior maxilla often requires sinus floor elevation to achieve adequate bone height. Magnetic mallet technology, a recent innovation in implant site preparation, offers a minimally invasive alternative to conventional drilling by condensing bone while preserving its vitality. This case report describes the staged management of a patient with cystic lesions involving teeth #16 and #17, subsequent sinus augmentation, and implant placement using the magnetic mallet (Osseotouch, Italy). 

Case Presentation: A 43‑year‑old female presented with purulent cystic lesions associated with teeth #16 and #17 and reactive sinus involvement. Initial treatment comprised extraction of the affected teeth, cyst enucleation, and placement of a calcium‑phosphate graft. After ten months, residual bone height was around 2 mm, necessitating lateral sinus floor elevation with bone grafting and a platelet‑rich fibrin (PRF) membrane. Four months later, cone‑beam computed tomography confirmed adequate bone dimensions. Implants were placed using a magnetic mallet with osteotomic inserts, achieving good primary stability. Final restorations were metal‑free crowns. 

Conclusion: The staged approach combining cyst enucleation, sinus augmentation with PRF, and magnetic mallet‑assisted implant placement resulted in successful functional and aesthetic restoration. The magnetic mallet allowed conservative, heat‑free bone preparation, contributing to favorable implant stability and healing.

References
[1]
Boyne PJ, James RA. Grafting of the maxillary sinus floor with autogenous marrow and bone. J Oral Surg. 1980;38(8):613–616. Google Scholar
[2]
Jensen OT, Shulman LB, Block MS, Iacono VJ. Report of the Sinus Consensus Conference of 1996. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1998;13 Suppl:11–45. Google Scholar
[3]
Summers RB. A new concept in maxillary implant surgery: the osteotome technique. Compendium. 1994;15(2):152, 154–156, 158 passim. Google Scholar
[4]
Del Fabbro M, Wallace SS, Testori T. Long term implant survival in the grafted maxillary sinus: a systematic review. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2013;33(6):773–783. https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.1288 Google Scholar
[5]
Misch CE. Contemporary Implant Dentistry. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2008. Google Scholar
[6]
Dohan DM, Choukroun J, Diss A, et al. Platelet rich fibrin (PRF): a second generation platelet concentrate. Part I: technological concepts and evolution. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006;101(3):e37–e44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.07.008 Google Scholar
[7]
Simonpieri A, Del Corso M, Sammartino G, Dohan Ehrenfest DM. The relevance of Choukroun's platelet rich fibrin and metronidazole during complex maxillary rehabilitations using bone allograft. Part II: implant surgery, prosthodontics, and survival. Implant Dent. 2009;18(3):220–229. https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0b013e31819b5e3f Google Scholar
[8]
Huwais S, Meyer EG. A novel osseous densification approach in implant osteotomy preparation to increase biomechanical primary stability, bone mineral density, and bone to implant contact. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017;32(1):27–36. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.4817 Google Scholar
[9]
Visale K, Manimala V, Vidhyasankari N, Shanmugapriya SV. Magnetic mallets – A stroke of luck in implantology: A review. J Acad Dent Educ. 2021;7:6–9. Google Scholar
[10]
Dolly AS, Saravanan AV, Ravishankar PL, Lochini S. Precision dental implant using magnetic mallets in the mandible. Contemp Clin Dent. 2025;16(1):53–55. Google Scholar
[11]
Caccianiga G, Ferri L, Baldoni M, Bader AA, Caccianiga P. Magnetic mallet and laser for a minimally invasive implantology: A full arch case report. Appl Sci. 2022;12:9995. Google Scholar
[12]
LeGeros RZ. Calcium phosphate-based osteoinductive materials. Chem Rev. 2008 Nov;108(11):4742-53. doi: 10.1021/cr800427g. Google Scholar
[13]
Dohan DM, Choukroun J, Diss A, Dohan SL, Dohan AJ, Mouhyi J, Gogly B. Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF): a second-generation platelet concentrate. Part II: platelet-related biologic features. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006 Mar;101(3):e45-50. doi: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2005.07.009 Google Scholar
[14]
Rajkumar B, Bhasin A, Shukla P, Gupta V, Bhatt A, Tekriwal S, et al. Extraction followed by implant placement using magnetic mallet: A case report. Int J Med Res Rev. 2016;4:1046–1048. doi: 10.17511/ijmrr.2016.i06.31 Google Scholar
[15]
Lahens B, Neiva R, Tovar N, Alifarag AM, Jimbo R, Bonfante EA, Bowers MM, Cuppini M, Freitas H, Witek L, Coelho PG. Biomechanical and histologic basis of osseodensification drilling for endosteal implant placement in low density bone. An experimental study in sheep. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2016 Oct;63:56-65. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2016.06.007. Google Scholar
[16]
Hindi AR, Bede SY. The effect of osseodensification on implant stability and bone density: A prospective observational study. J Clin Exp Dent. 2020 May 1;12(5):e474-e478. doi: 10.4317/jced.56727. Google Scholar
[17]
Desai A, Patil S, Mitra D, Shah R. Magnetic mallet-feel the future. J Indian Dent Assoc. 2020;14:26–30. doi: 10.33882/jida.13.25521 Google Scholar
[18]
Conrad HJ, Seong WJ, Pesun IJ. Current ceramic materials and systems with clinical recommendations: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2007 Nov;98(5):389-404. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3913(07)60124-3. Google Scholar
[19]
Del Fabbro M, Testori T, Francetti L, Weinstein R. Systematic review of survival rates for implants placed in the grafted maxillary sinus. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2004;24(6):565–577. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.04.024. Google Scholar