Abstract
Zygomatic implant treatment is widely applied for severe maxillary atrophy to help
rehabilitate the maxillary dentition. This retrospective study was performed to evaluate
the actual radiographic bone–implant contact (rBIC) lengths of zygomatic implants.
The records of 28 patients who underwent zygomatic implant surgery and subsequent
follow-up examinations between August 2013 and September 2018 in the Department of
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital were reviewed. The surgeries
were performed by a single surgeon using the same treatment protocol. All patients
had a computed tomography scan at 1 year after the surgery. Using three-dimensional imaging software, an investigator
measured the rBIC lengths of 66 implants and documented their clinical status. The
implant survival rate was 100%. The mean rBIC length was significantly longer in male
patients than in female patients (20.80 ± 5.88 mm versus 17.79 ± 6.34 mm; P = 0.028). The mean rBIC length of double zygomatic implants was significantly longer
when compared to that of single implants (21.11 ± 6.23 mm versus 17.75 ± 5.85 mm; P = 0.027). This article is novel in reporting the exact rBIC lengths of zygomatic implants
in a clinical setting. The results showed that zygomatic implants are a viable treatment
modality for full-mouth rehabilitation.
Key words
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial SurgeryAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Surgery and fixture installation.Zygomaticus fixture clinical procedures. First edition. Nobel Biocare AB, Goteborg, Sweden1998: 1
- Remote implant anchorage for the rehabilitation of maxillary defects.J Prosthet Dent. 2001; 86: 377-381
- Titanium implants in the zygoma as retaining elements after hemimaxillectomy.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997; 12: 211-221
- Zygomatic implant-based rehabilitation for patients with maxillary and mid-face oncology defects: a review.Oral Dis. 2021; 27: 27-41
- Survival and complications of zygomatic implants: an updated systematic review.J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016; 74: 1949-1964
- Zygomatic implants: indications, techniques and outcomes, and the zygomatic success code.Periodontol 2000. 2014; 66: 41-58
- Zygomatic bone-to-implant contact in 77 patients with partially or completely edentulous maxillas.J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012; 70: 2065-2069
- Immediate/early loading of zygomatic implants: clinical experiences after 2 to 5 years of follow‐up.Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2010; 12: e77-e82
- Placement of zygomatic implants into the malar prominence of the maxillary bone for apical fixation: a clinical report of 5 to 13 years.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017; 32: 633-641
- Rehabilitation of atrophic maxilla: a review of 101 zygomatic implants.Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2008; 13: E363-E370
- Clinical outcome of 302 zygomatic implants in 110 patients with a follow-up between 6 months and 7 years.Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2020; 22: 415-423
- A proposed classification for zygomatic implant patient based on the zygoma anatomy guided approach (ZAGA): a cross-sectional survey.Eur J Oral Implantol. 2011; 4: 269-275
- A new approach to rehabilitate the severely atrophic maxilla using extramaxillary anchored implants in immediate function: a pilot study.J Prosthet Dent. 2008; 100: 354-366
- Extramaxillary surgical technique: clinical outcome of 352 patients rehabilitated with 747 zygomatic implants with a follow‐up between 6 months and 7 years.Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015; 17: e153-e162
- Zygomatic implants placed with a 2-stage procedure: a 5-year retrospective study.Eur J Oral Implantol. 2009; 2: 115-124
- Rehabilitation of the edentulous maxilla with the zygoma concept: a 7-year prospective study.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010; 25: 1213-1221
- Zygomatic implants: a solution for the atrophic maxilla.Dent Clin North Am. 2020; 64: 401-409
- Virtual quad zygoma implant placement using cone beam computed tomography: sufficiency of malar bone volume, intraosseous implant length, and relationship to the sinus according to the degree of alveolar bone atrophy.Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018; 47: 252-261
- Three-dimensional finite elemental analysis of zygomatic implants in craniofacial structures.Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007; 36: 620-625
- Zygomatic implants: the impact of zygoma bone support on biomechanics.J Oral Implantol. 2014; 40: 231-237
- Stresses generated by two zygomatic implant placement techniques associated with conventional inclined anterior implants.Ann Med Surg. 2018; 30: 22-27
- Influence of alveolar bone defects on the stress distribution in quad zygomatic implant-supported maxillary prosthesis.Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018; 33: 693-700
Article info
Publication history
Published online: January 25, 2021
Accepted:
January 8,
2021
Identification
Copyright
© 2021 International Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
