Extramaxillary Zygomatic Implants: An Alternative Approach for the Reconstruction of the Atrophic Maxilla.
Atrophic
extramaxillary
implant
maxilla
zygomatic
Journal
Annals of maxillofacial surgery
ISSN: 2231-0746
Titre abrégé: Ann Maxillofac Surg
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101598423
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
13
07
2019
revised:
27
08
2019
accepted:
09
10
2019
entrez:
29
8
2020
pubmed:
29
8
2020
medline:
29
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Limited bone quality in the posterior maxilla results in low success rates for dental implants. Various bone augmentation methods have been described, yet most require two-step surgical procedures with relatively high rates of resorption and failure. An alternative for these patients is zygomatic implants. Zygomatic implants utilize the basal craniofacial bone. A retrospective study was conducted on 25 patients exhibiting ridges classified as V-VI according to the Cawood and Howell classification. Seventy-six extramaxillary zygomatic implants were placed. Immediate rehabilitation was performed with a mean follow-up of 18.6 months. Three implants failed, and two were replaced successfully. No significant bone loss was observed in the rest of the implants. Soft tissue around the implant heads healed properly. All implants were prosthetically rehabilitated successfully. Zygomatic implants allow for immediate loading of an atrophic maxilla. The emergence of the implant is prosthetically correct compared to the intrasinus approach, leading to better dental hygiene and decreased mechanical resistance. 96.1% of the implants survived, with good anchorage and proper soft tissue healing and rehabilitation. We suggest using extramaxillary zygomatic fixture as the first line of treatment in severe atrophic maxilla.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Limited bone quality in the posterior maxilla results in low success rates for dental implants. Various bone augmentation methods have been described, yet most require two-step surgical procedures with relatively high rates of resorption and failure. An alternative for these patients is zygomatic implants. Zygomatic implants utilize the basal craniofacial bone.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
A retrospective study was conducted on 25 patients exhibiting ridges classified as V-VI according to the Cawood and Howell classification. Seventy-six extramaxillary zygomatic implants were placed. Immediate rehabilitation was performed with a mean follow-up of 18.6 months.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Three implants failed, and two were replaced successfully. No significant bone loss was observed in the rest of the implants. Soft tissue around the implant heads healed properly. All implants were prosthetically rehabilitated successfully.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Zygomatic implants allow for immediate loading of an atrophic maxilla. The emergence of the implant is prosthetically correct compared to the intrasinus approach, leading to better dental hygiene and decreased mechanical resistance. 96.1% of the implants survived, with good anchorage and proper soft tissue healing and rehabilitation. We suggest using extramaxillary zygomatic fixture as the first line of treatment in severe atrophic maxilla.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32855928
doi: 10.4103/ams.ams_157_19
pii: AMS-10-127
pmc: PMC7433948
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
127-132Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2020 Annals of Maxillofacial Surgery.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
There are no conflicts of interest.
Références
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996 May-Jun;11(3):387-94
pubmed: 8752560
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012 Sep;41(9):1077-89
pubmed: 22575179
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2008 Jun 01;13(6):E363-70
pubmed: 18521062
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1996 Apr;54(4):486-94
pubmed: 8600266
J Prosthet Dent. 2008 Nov;100(5):354-66
pubmed: 18992569
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009 Nov;67(11 Suppl):31-9
pubmed: 19835748
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019 Feb;57(2):151-156
pubmed: 30685182
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997 Sep-Oct;12(5):634-42
pubmed: 9337024
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2004 Sep;41(5):571-4
pubmed: 15352853
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2004 Feb;15(1):18-22
pubmed: 15005100
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1995 May-Jun;10(3):335-44
pubmed: 7615330
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017 Dec;46(12):1592-1599
pubmed: 28655434
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1997 Oct;26(5):358-64
pubmed: 9327287
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Jan;17 Suppl 1:e153-62
pubmed: 24004279
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002 Nov-Dec;17(6):861-5
pubmed: 12507247
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1988 Aug;17(4):232-6
pubmed: 3139793
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006 Mar;64(3):471-5
pubmed: 16487811
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1993;8(1):45-53
pubmed: 8468086