Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 3, 2026

Real-Time Dynamic Navigation System for the Precise Quad-Zygomatic Implant Placement in a Patient with a Severely Atrophic Maxilla
Published on: October 18, 2021
Straight and tilted implants for supporting screw-retained full-arch dental prostheses in atrophic maxillae: A 2-year
M Menéndez-Collar1, M-A Serrera-Figallo, P Hita-Iglesias
1Oral Surgery Department, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Seville, C/ Avicena s/n, 41009 Seville, SPAIN, danieltl@us.es.
Background:
To evaluate, over a 2-year period, the treatment outcomes for maxillary full-arch fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) supported by a combination of both tilted and axially-placed implants and to compare the marginal bone loss (MBL) and implant survival rates (SR) between tilted and axial implants.
Material And Methods:
A retrospective study has been carried out. Thirty-two patients (16 males and 16 females) treated with maxillary full-arch FDPs were included in this retrospective study. A total of 187 implants were inserted to rehabilitate the fully edentulous maxillary arches: 36% of them were tilted (T group, n = 68) and the remaining 64% were axially placed (A group, n = 119). From the total, 28% of the implants (n=53) were immediately loaded with screw-retained provisional acrylic restorations, whereas 72% underwent conventional delayed prosthetic loading 6 months post-operatively. Definitive restorations were hybrid implant prostheses (metal framework covered with high-density acrylic resin) and metal-ceramic screw-retained implant prostheses, and were placed 6 months after surgery. Such definitive restorations were checked for proper function and aesthetics every three months for two years. Peri-implant marginal bone levels were assessed by digital radiographs immediately after surgery and MBL was assessed at definitive implant loading (baseline) and 2 years afterwards.
Results:
The 2-year implant SR were 100% for axially placed implants and 98.5% for tilted implants. No significant differences were found amongst the A and T implant groups. Marginal bone loss measured at 2 years after definitive prosthetic loading was of -0.73 ± 0.72 mm (maximum MBL of 1.43 mm) for axially positioned implants vs. -0.51 ± 0.92 mm for tilted implants (maximum bone 1.45 mm). Differences in MBL were statistically significant when comparing immediately and delayed loaded implants.
Conclusions:
Based on the results of this retrospective clinical study, full-arch fixed prostheses supported by a combination of both tilted and axially placed implants may be considered a predictable and viable treatment modality for the prosthetic rehabilitation of the completely edentulous maxilla.
Related Concept Videos
The Arch of Aorta
Encircling the heart, the coronary arteries form a ring-like structure before...
Screw: Problem Solving
To evaluate the...
Self-Locking Screw
A square-threaded screw jack carrying a load is considered self-locking if the screw retains its position even after the moment applied to it is removed.
Generation of Straight or Branched Actin Filaments
Arp2/3 Complex
Arp2/3 complex is a seven-subunit complex consisting of two proteins similar to actin- Arp2 and Arp3, and five other subunits that help keep Arp2 and Arp3 inactive. When required, the complex is...
Magnetic Field Due to Two Straight Wires
Magnetic Field Due To A Thin Straight Wire

