Rubén Davó1, Chantal Malevez, Olivia Pons. 1. Department of Implantology and Maxillofacial Surgery, Meimar International Hospital, Alicante, Spain. rdavo@hospitalmedimar.com
Abstract
PURPOSE: This prospective study was designed to assess the long-term outcome of immediately loaded zygomatic implants placed in atrophic maxillae. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-two consecutively treated patients received 81 zygomatic implants and 140 conventional implants for oral rehabilitation and were followed for 5 years. Complete arch rehabilitation was accomplished in 37 patients and partial arch rehabilitation in 5 (one zygomatic implant in combination with two conventional implants). Outcome measures were prosthetic and implant failures, and complications. RESULTS: Twelve zygomatic and 22 conventional implants in 6 patients were not reviewed as patients were lost to follow-up. One zygomatic implant was removed at the 3-year follow-up visit because of lack of osseointegration and disturbances around the zygomatic region. The success rate of zygomatic implants was 98.5% (68/69). Six conventional implants were lost, with a success rate of 94.9% (112/118). One of the definitive prostheses was changed after 4 years of follow-up. Six complications occurred during the entire follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: The 5-year prognosis was found to be good for immediately loaded zygomatic implants together with conventional implants in severely resorbed maxillae.
PURPOSE: This prospective study was designed to assess the long-term outcome of immediately loaded zygomatic implants placed in atrophic maxillae. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-two consecutively treated patients received 81 zygomatic implants and 140 conventional implants for oral rehabilitation and were followed for 5 years. Complete arch rehabilitation was accomplished in 37 patients and partial arch rehabilitation in 5 (one zygomatic implant in combination with two conventional implants). Outcome measures were prosthetic and implant failures, and complications. RESULTS: Twelve zygomatic and 22 conventional implants in 6 patients were not reviewed as patients were lost to follow-up. One zygomatic implant was removed at the 3-year follow-up visit because of lack of osseointegration and disturbances around the zygomatic region. The success rate of zygomatic implants was 98.5% (68/69). Six conventional implants were lost, with a success rate of 94.9% (112/118). One of the definitive prostheses was changed after 4 years of follow-up. Six complications occurred during the entire follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: The 5-year prognosis was found to be good for immediately loaded zygomatic implants together with conventional implants in severely resorbed maxillae.
Authors: Carlo Maiorana; Mario Beretta; Davide Rancitelli; Giovanni Battista Grossi; Marco Cicciù; Alan Scott Herford Journal: Case Rep Dent Date: 2016-02-23
Authors: M Menéndez-Collar; M-A Serrera-Figallo; P Hita-Iglesias; R Castillo-Oyagüe; J-C Casar-Espinosa; A Gutiérrez-Corrales; J-L Gutiérrez-Perez; D Torres-Lagares Journal: Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal Date: 2018-11-01
Authors: Julio Tobar-Reyes; Luis Andueza-Castro; Antonio Jiménez-Silva; Roger Bustamante-Plaza; Juan Carvajal-Herrera Journal: Clin Exp Dent Res Date: 2021-05-27