Survival of Conventional Dental Implants in the Edentulous Atrophic Maxilla in Combination with Zygomatic Implants: a 20-year Retrospective Study

Overview

Journal Int J Implant Dent

Publisher Springer

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2022 Jun 15

PMID 35704150

Authors

Luc Vrielinck

Jorden Blok

Constantinus Politis

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: Implant-supported prosthetic rehabilitation in the resorbed maxilla is a great challenge. The aim of this study was to determine the survival rate of conventional anterior implants placed in combination with zygomatic implants according to the Brånemark technique, and to identify risk factors for implant failure.

Methods: We collected data retrospectively from 72 consecutive patients who received treatment from 1998 to 2018 at our center, according to Brånemark's original technique. Kaplan-Meier analysis was conducted to assess survival rate, and a survival regression model was used with the patient as the random factor, applying the Weibull distribution.

Results: A total of 236 maxillary anterior implants were included, with a mean follow-up of 12.1 years. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed overall cumulative survival rates of 95.3% at 1 year, 94.8% at 2 years, 93.0% at 5 years, 90.5% at 10 years, 81.6% at 15 years, and 67.7% at 20 years. Survival regression showed an association between bruxism and implant failure as well as implants bearing an overdenture. Implants with length ≤ 10 mm had a significantly lower survival time. No significant association was found between the number of anterior implants and survival rate.

Conclusions: We found acceptable long-term anterior conventional implant survival. Significant risk factors for failure were bruxism, overdentures, and implants shorter than 10 mm.

Citing Articles

Dental Implant with Porous Structure and Anchorage: Design and Bench Testing in a Calf Rib Model Study.

Lovera K, Vanaclocha V, Atienza C, Vanaclocha A, Jorda-Gomez P, Saiz-Sapena N Materials (Basel). 2025; 18(3).

PMID: 39942366 PMC: 11820065. DOI: 10.3390/ma18030700.

The Rehabilitation of Partially Edentulous Maxilla With Unilateral Zygomatic Implants: A Retrospective Study up to 23 Years Follow-Up.

Fan S, Davo R, Al-Nawas B, Castellon E, Valmaseda-Castellon E Clin Oral Implants Res. 2024; 36(2):228-238.

PMID: 39545437 PMC: 11810560. DOI: 10.1111/clr.14377.

How far can we go? A 20-year meta-analysis of dental implant survival rates.

Kupka J, Konig J, Al-Nawas B, Sagheb K, Schiegnitz E Clin Oral Investig. 2024; 28(10):541.

PMID: 39305362 PMC: 11416373. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-024-05929-3.

All-on-4 Hybrid with Extra-Long Transnasal Implants: Descriptions of the Technique and Short-Term Outcomes in Three Cases.

Nunes M, de Araujo Nobre M, Camargo V J Clin Med. 2024; 13(11).

PMID: 38893060 PMC: 11172536. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13113348.

Indications for zygomatic implants: a systematic review.

Polido W, Machado-Fernandez A, Lin W, Aghaloo T Int J Implant Dent. 2023; 9(1):17.

PMID: 37391575 PMC: 10313639. DOI: 10.1186/s40729-023-00480-4.

References

Mozzati M, Monfrin S, Pedretti G, Schierano G, Bassi F . Immediate loading of maxillary fixed prostheses retained by zygomatic and conventional implants: 24-month preliminary data for a series of clinical case reports. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008; 23(2):308-14. View

Rosenstein J, Dym H . Zygomatic Implants: A Solution for the Atrophic Maxilla. Dent Clin North Am. 2020; 64(2):401-409. DOI: 10.1016/j.cden.2019.12.005. View

Sendyk D, Chrcanovic B, Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A, Deboni M . Does Surgical Experience Influence Implant Survival Rate? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int J Prosthodont. 2017; 30(30):341-347. DOI: 10.11607/ijp.5211. View

Farzad P, Andersson L, Gunnarsson S, Johansson B . Rehabilitation of severely resorbed maxillae with zygomatic implants: an evaluation of implant stability, tissue conditions, and patients' opinion before and after treatment. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006; 21(3):399-404. View

Kahnberg K, Henry P, Hirsch J, Ohrnell L, Andreasson L, Branemark P . Clinical evaluation of the zygoma implant: 3-year follow-up at 16 clinics. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007; 65(10):2033-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2007.05.013. View

Higuchi K . The zygomaticus fixture: an alternative approach for implant anchorage in the posterior maxilla. Ann R Australas Coll Dent Surg. 2001; 15:28-33. View

Aparicio C, Manresa C, Francisco K, Ouazzani W, Claros P, Potau J . The long-term use of zygomatic implants: a 10-year clinical and radiographic report. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012; 16(3):447-59. DOI: 10.1111/cid.12007. View

Sendyk D, Rovai E, Pannuti C, Deboni M, Sendyk W, Wennerberg A . Dental implant loss in older versus younger patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. J Oral Rehabil. 2016; 44(3):229-236. DOI: 10.1111/joor.12465. View

Gomes G, Misawa M, Fernandes C, Pannuti C, Saraiva L, Huynh-Ba G . A systematic review and meta-analysis of the survival rate of implants placed in previously failed sites. Braz Oral Res. 2018; 32:e27. DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2018.vol32.0027. View

10.

Goncalves T, Campos C, Rodrigues Garcia R . Effects of implant-based prostheses on mastication, nutritional intake, and oral health-related quality of life in partially edentulous patients: a paired clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015; 30(2):391-6. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.3770. View

11.

Chrcanovic B, Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A . Bruxism and Dental Implants: A Meta-Analysis. Implant Dent. 2015; 24(5):505-16. DOI: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000298. View

12.

Chrcanovic B, Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A . Reasons for failures of oral implants. J Oral Rehabil. 2014; 41(6):443-76. DOI: 10.1111/joor.12157. View

13.

Block M, Haggerty C, Fisher G . Nongrafting implant options for restoration of the edentulous maxilla. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009; 67(4):872-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2008.10.008. View

14.

Bedrossian E . Rehabilitation of the edentulous maxilla with the zygoma concept: a 7-year prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011; 25(6):1213-21. View

15.

Ohkubo C, Baek K . Does the presence of antagonist remaining teeth affect implant overdenture success? A systematic review. J Oral Rehabil. 2010; 37(4):306-12. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02054.x. View

16.

Palma-Carrio C, Maestre-Ferrin L, Penarrocha-Oltra D, Penarrocha-Diago M, Penarrocha-Diago M . Risk factors associated with early failure of dental implants. A literature review. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2011; 16(4):e514-7. DOI: 10.4317/medoral.16.e514. View

17.

Kern J, Kern T, Wolfart S, Heussen N . A systematic review and meta-analysis of removable and fixed implant-supported prostheses in edentulous jaws: post-loading implant loss. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015; 27(2):174-95. PMC: 5024059. DOI: 10.1111/clr.12531. View

18.

Sun H, Huang C, Wu Y, Shi B . Failure rates of short (≤ 10 mm) dental implants and factors influencing their failure: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011; 26(4):816-25. View

19.

Becktor J, Isaksson S, Abrahamsson P, Sennerby L . Evaluation of 31 zygomatic implants and 74 regular dental implants used in 16 patients for prosthetic reconstruction of the atrophic maxilla with cross-arch fixed bridges. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2005; 7(3):159-65. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2005.tb00060.x. View

20.

Malo P, de Araujo Nobre M, Lopes I . A new approach to rehabilitate the severely atrophic maxilla using extramaxillary anchored implants in immediate function: a pilot study. J Prosthet Dent. 2008; 100(5):354-66. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60237-1. View