Publication: Retrospective Analysis of Zygomatic Implants for Maxillary Prosthetic Rehabilitation
| dc.contributor.author | VAROL, ALTAN | |
| dc.contributor.author | DERGİN, GÜHAN | |
| dc.contributor.author | GARİP, HASAN | |
| dc.contributor.author | CAN, SERHAT | |
| dc.contributor.authors | Yalcin, Mustafa; Can, Serhat; Akbas, Mert; Dergin, Guhan; Garip, Hasan; Aydil, Baris Altug; Varol, Altan | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-03-12T22:44:05Z | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-01-11T06:37:50Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2022-03-12T22:44:05Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate 141 zygomatic implants for the reconstruction of severely atrophic maxillae. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective case series study, zygomatic implants were placed under general anesthesia. Inclusion criteria were as follows: ASA I or ASA II, age older than 18 years, inadequate bone for restoration with conventional implants, alternative augmentation procedures considered either inappropriate or contraindicated, absence of a medical condition related to implant failure, and providing written consent. Zygomatic implants used in the study consisted of three different brands: NobelZygoma, Southern Implants System, and Implantswiss. Results: The study included 45 patients, in whom 141 zygomatic implants were placed. The mean age of the patients was 51.76 (range: 23 to 72) years. Three patients were rehabilitated with removable prostheses, 19 patients with fixed prostheses, and 23 patients with hybrid prostheses. The overall complication rate was 5.67% (two zygomatic implants developed infection [1.4%], one zygomatic implant developed peri-implantitis [0.7%], three zygomatic implants developed sinusitis [2.1%], and two zygomatic implants showed unsuccessful prosthetic rehabilitation [1.4%]). The follow-up period ranged from 6 to 36 months. Conclusion: Clinical complications of zygomatic implants are acceptable, and their survival rates are similar to those of endosteal implants. Zygomatic implants can contribute to prosthetic rehabilitation. | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.11607/jomi.8196 | |
| dc.identifier.eissn | 1942-4434 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0882-2786 | |
| dc.identifier.pubmed | 32724927 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/11424/236394 | |
| dc.identifier.wos | WOS:000555952800012 | |
| dc.language.iso | eng | |
| dc.publisher | QUINTESSENCE PUBLISHING CO INC | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS | |
| dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess | |
| dc.subject | atrophic maxilla | |
| dc.subject | survival rate | |
| dc.subject | zygomatic implant | |
| dc.subject | EDENTULOUS MAXILLA | |
| dc.subject | ATROPHIC MAXILLA | |
| dc.subject | DENTAL IMPLANTS | |
| dc.subject | RESTORATION | |
| dc.title | Retrospective Analysis of Zygomatic Implants for Maxillary Prosthetic Rehabilitation | |
| dc.type | article | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| oaire.citation.endPage | 756 | |
| oaire.citation.issue | 4 | |
| oaire.citation.startPage | 750 | |
| oaire.citation.title | INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS | |
| oaire.citation.volume | 35 |
