Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 15, 2025
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
Graftless Solutions for Rehabilitation of Atrophied Maxilla - Zygomatic Versus Subperiosteal Implants - A Systematic
M V S Sudhir1, Rajendra B Prasad2, Niranjani Krothapalli3
1Oral Maxillofacial Surgery, Continuum Oral Health Inc, Framingham, Massachusetts, United States.
Purpose:
Rehabilitation of severely atrophic maxillae is challenging when graft-based techniques are unsuitable. This review compares zygomatic and subperiosteal implants for clinical outcomes, complications, and procedural considerations.
Methods:
A systematic search in major databases identified studies on zygomatic and subperiosteal implants, analyzing survival rates, complications, and patient satisfaction.
Results:
Zygomatic implants (623 patients) showed a 96.1% survival rate, with sinusitis as a common complication. Subperiosteal implants (257 patients) had a 97.8% short-term survival rate, with soft tissue dehiscence as the main issue. CAD/CAM improved subperiosteal implant outcomes.
Conclusions:
Both implants are effective, with zygomatic implants offering established long-term success and subperiosteal implants emerging as a customizable alternative. Further studies are needed for validation.
