The use of zygomatic implants for prosthetic rehabilitation of the severely resorbed maxilla

Endoscopically-Assisted Zygomatic Implant Placement: A Novel Approach

“…The concept of this treatment modality was first developed to obtain anchorage and consequent stability in the zygomatic bone by the use of longer implants ([30 mm) and the placement of 2-4 standard implants in the anterior area to increase prosthesis support. In the past decades, this alternative to bone-grafting procedures has shown its predictability by demonstrating high survival rate ([95 % over a medium-/long-term follow-up) and few technical and biologic complications to bone grafting approaches in posterior maxilla and thus, its application in the routine rehabilitation for patients with severe atrophic maxilla [12][13][14].…”

Multiple Zygomatic Implants as an Alternative for Rehabilitation of the Extremely Atrophic Maxilla: A Case Letter With 55 Months of Follow-Up

“…4 These implants have also been widely used for rehabilitation of maxillary defects as a result of tumor resections, congenital defects, trauma, and cases of severe atrophy of the maxilla. 5,6 Indeed, the applicability of zygomatic implants represents a simplification of the conventional treatment of atrophic maxillae, which is based in bone augmentation procedures associated with dental implant placement. Therefore, these implants involve a less invasive surgical technique, reduction of costs, and treatment duration, compared to conventional rehabilitation of atrophic maxillae.…”

To Graft or Not to Graft? Evidence-Based Guide to Decision Making in Oral Bone Graft Surgery

“…While palatal emergence (up to 12 mm medial to the ridge) is frequent with zygomatic implants and may cause prosthetic difficulties (Att et al, 2009), their generally posterior position has been shown to cause problems with oral hygiene. Peri-implant bleeding, soft tissue hyperplasia and increased pocket depths have been recorded in up to 45% of cases (Aparicio et al, 2008) and may result in oroantral fistula formation and subsequent maxillary sinusitis (Figure 7). Recent developments such as extrasinusal placement and the use of CT-based surgical stents may help to overcome these problems, however, it should be considered that mean angular deviations of 4° using mucosa-supported templates (Jung et al, 2009;Vasak et al, 2011) may result in significantly higher imprecision at the apex of 30 to 55 mm long implants.…”

“…Likewise, evidence on non-grafting treatment alternatives, i.e. short, tilted or zygomatic implants, was sought (Aparicio et al, 2008;Att et al, 2009;Del Fabbro et al, 2010;Esposito et al, 2005;Hagi et al, 2004;Jung et al, 2009;Kotosovilis et al, 2009;Pommer et al, 2011;Renouard & Nisand, 2006;Stellingsma et al, 2004).…”