Clinical outcomes and biological and mechanical complications of immediate fixed prostheses supported by zygomatic implants: A retrospective analysis from a prospective clinical study with up to 11 years of follow-up

Hygienic maintenance in patients with maxillae atrophy and in oncological patients with maxillary resection rehabilitated with zygomatic implants: A nested monocentric prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess peri-implant soft tissues condition, comparing clinical parameters of implants placed in patients with atrophic upper jaws and patients who underwent maxillary resection for oncological reasons.

BACKGROUND

Zygomatic implants (ZIs) in oncologic patients could be affected by more complications compared to implants placed in atrophic maxillae. The soft tissue condition is an essential requirement for implant success, but few studies have investigated this topic.

METHODS

A nested monocentric prospective parallel cohort (atrophic vs. oncological patients) study was performed. Clinical visits and professional hygiene sessions were performed every three months, and bleeding on probing (BOP), probing pocket depth (PPD), gingival index (GI), plaque index (PI) and implant mobility were recorded by a blind outcome assessor.

RESULTS

In total, 77 ZIs placed in 21 patients were evaluated: 54 (70.1%) ZIs were inserted in patients belonging to the atrophic cohort (PAM) and 23 (29.9%) ZIs in the oncologic cohort (OP). The probability of having BOP at the considered mean follow-up (27 months) was 24.8% (95% CI 19.0-31.9) for PAM and 22.9% (95% CI 15.1-33.9) OP. The mean PPD values were 2.78 ± 1.28 (range 1-8) in PAM and 2.91 ± 1.98 (range 0-10) in OP. None of the implants showed mobility. No associations between group belongingness and the entity of PPD, PI, GI and the risk of BOP were found, adjusting for the considered confounding factors (age, smoking and implant position).

CONCLUSIONS

Under a strict supportive hygiene therapy protocol ZIs in oncologic patients showed similar peri-implant tissue conditions to that of patients with maxillary atrophy.

Finite Element Analysis (FEA) of a Premaxillary Device: A New Type of Subperiosteal Implant to Treat Severe Atrophy of the Maxilla

Extreme atrophy of the maxilla still poses challenges for clinicians. Some of the techniques used to address this issue can be complex, risky, expensive, and time consuming, often requiring skilled surgeons. While many commonly used techniques have achieved very high success rates, complications may arise in certain cases. In this context, the premaxillary device (PD) technique offers a simpler approach to reconstruct severely atrophic maxillae, aiming to avoid more complicated and risky surgical procedures. Finite element analysis (FEA) enables the evaluation of different aspects of dental implant biomechanics. Our results demonstrated that using a PD allows for an optimal distribution of stresses on the basal bone, avoiding tension peaks that can lead to bone resorption or implant failure. ANSYS® was used to perform localized finite element analysis (FEA), enabling a more precise examination of the peri-crestal area and the PD through an accurate mesh element reconstruction, which facilitated the mathematical solution of FEA. The most favorable biomechanical behavior was observed for materials such as titanium alloys, which helped to reduce stress levels on bone, implants, screws, and abutments. Additionally, stress values remained within the limits of basal bone and titanium alloy strengths. In conclusion, from a biomechanical point of view, PDs appear to be viable alternatives for rehabilitating severe atrophic maxillae.

Indications for zygomatic implants: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the evidence regarding the indications for placement of zygomatic implants to rehabilitate edentulous maxillae.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A focused question using the PIO format was developed, questioning "in patients in need of an implant-supported rehabilitation of the edentulous maxillae, what are the indications for the use of zygomatic implants''. The primary information analyzed and collected was a clear description of the indication for the use of zygomatic implants.

RESULTS

A total of 1266 records were identified through database searching. The full-text review was conducted for 117 papers, and 10 were selected to be included in this review. Zygomatic implant indications were extreme bone atrophy or deficiency secondary to different factors. The quad zygoma concept (two zygomatic implants bilaterally placed and splinted) was applied to 107 patients, the classic zygoma concept (one zygomatic implant bilaterally placed and splinted to standard anterior implants) was used in 88 patients, and the unilateral concept (one zygomatic implant on one side, splinted with one or more conventional implants) was employed in 14 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The main indication for the use of zygomatic implants was considered extreme maxillary bone atrophy, resulting from many factors. The clear definition of what was considered "extreme bone atrophy" is not uniquely defined in each paper. Further studies are needed to develop clear indications for zygomatic implants.

Survival and complications of zygomatic implants compared to conventional implants reported in longitudinal studies with a follow-up period of at least 5 years: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Zygomatic implants (ZI) have been frequently indicated to rehabilitate patients with extensive atrophies in alternatives to major bone reconstructions. It can be installed inside the maxillary sinus, called instrasinus zygomatic implant (IZI) or outside the maxillary sinus (EZI), depending on the surgery technique.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the survival and complication rates of ZI in longitudinal studies when compared with conventional implants (CI).

METHODS

An electronic search was performed in five databases and in Gray literature for articles published until April, 2022. The eligibility criteria comprised observational cohort studies (prospective or retrospective) and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with at least 5 years of follow-up, reporting survival rate of ZI versus CI. A meta-analysis was conduct with 18 studies.

RESULTS

A total of 5434 implants (2972 ZI and 2462 CI) were analyzed in 1709 patients. The mean survival rate was 96.5% ± 5.02 and 95.8% ± 6.36 for ZI and CI, respectively (mean follow-up time of 78 months). There were observed no statistically significant between ZI and CI in prospective studies (risk ratio [RR] of 1.21; 95% confidence intervals [CIs]: 0.28 to 5.28; chi-squared [Chi² ] = 11.37; I²  = 56%; degrees of freedom [df] = 5; z-score = 0.25; P = 0.80), retrospective studies IZI (RR of 1.29; 95% CIs: 0.52 to 3.23; Chi²  = 4.07; I²  = 2%; df = 4; z-score = 0.55; P = 0.58) and retrospective studies EZI (RR of 0.72; 95% CIs: 0.31 to 1.66; Chi²  = 1.99; I²  = 0%; df = 3; z-score = 0.78; P = 0.44). The biological complications most related to ZI was sinusitis, followed by infection and oroantral communication.

CONCLUSION

ZI have a high long-term survival rate (96.5% with a mean of 91.5 months of follow-up), showing no significant difference when compared with CI. The most prevalent biological complication is sinusitis, being most commonly to the IZI technique. This systematic review (SR) was registered in INPLASY under number INPLASY202280025.

Custom-made computer-aided-design/ computer-assisted-manufacturing (CAD/CAM) synthetic bone grafts for alveolar ridge augmentation: A retrospective clinical study with 3 years of follow-up

PURPOSE

To report on the results obtained with computer-aided-design/ computer-assisted-manufacturing (CAD/CAM) custom-made synthetic hydroxyapatite/beta-tricalcium-phosphate (HA/beta-TCP) bone grafts in alveolar ridge augmentation for dental implant placement.

METHODS

The procedure included: (1) cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) of the bone defect; (2) virtual design of the custom-made onlay bone grafts; (3) milling of grafts from a pre-formed block of synthetic HA/beta-TCP; and (4) bone reconstructive surgery. Implants were placed 8 months later. The patients were followed for 3 years. The study outcomes were: (1) intra- and immediate post-operative complications; (2) 8-month vertical and horizontal bone gain; (3) implant survival; (4) implant-crown success; and (5) peri-implant marginal bone loss (MBL).

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients underwent ridge augmentation with custom-made CAD/CAM HA/beta-TCP onlay grafts. Eight months later, these patients were rehabilitated with dental implants. During surgery, 25/26 (96.1%) of the grafts adapted well to the bone defect. Immediate post-operative complications were pain and swelling (2/26 patients: 7.6%), and bone graft exposure (3/26: 11.5%); one exposure led to infection, removal of the graft, and failure of the procedure. Excellent integration of the other grafts was observed 8 months after the regenerative procedure, with mean vertical and horizontal bone gains of 2.10 mm (± 0.35) and 2.96 mm (± 0.45), respectively. Twenty-five implants were placed and restored with single crowns. Three years later, all implants were in function. The 3-year implant crown success rate and peri-implant MBL were 92.0% and 0.7 mm (±0.19), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

With custom-made CAD/CAM synthetic HA/beta-TCP onlay grafts reconstruction of small vertical and/or horizontal defects of the alveolar ridge was obtained; this enabled implant placement, with high implant-crown success rate after 3 years. Further studies are needed to validate this technique.

STATEMENT OF CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Custom-made CAD/CAM synthetic HA/beta-TCP onlay grafts may represent an option for regeneration of small bone defects prior to implant placement.

Digital Workflow for the Design, Manufacture, and Application of Custom-Made Short Implants With Wing Retention Device

The severe deficiency of vertical bone height in the posterior maxillary region poses a challenge to implant restoration. In response to this issue, this article introduces a custom-made short implant with a wing retention structure and describes a precise and minimally invasive dental implant restoration scheme with digital technology.