ArticleAnnals of maxillofacial surgery
A Radiographic Study on Pterygoid Implants with Hamulus as a Landmark for Engaging the Pterygoid Plate - A Retrospective Study.
Article in Annals of maxillofacial surgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Segmentation-Assisted Three-Dimensional Planning Workflow for Static-Guided Pterygoid Implant Placement: A Proof-of-Concept Report.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Comparison of posterior support strategies with pterygoid implants for full-arch implant rehabilitation in the atrophic maxilla: a finite element study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the morphology of pterygoid hamulus using cone beam computed tomography: A retrospective study.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Rehabilitating the posterior maxilla with pterygoid implants can be quite challenging as the area entails many hindrances for implant placement. Although few studies have reported the three-dimensional angulations according to various planes (Frankfort horizontal (FH), sagittal plane, occlusal or maxillary planes), no anatomical landmarks have been identified to guide their placement. This study aimed at analysing the three-dimensional angulation of pterygoid implants using the hamulus as an intraoral guide. Methods: Pre-operative cone-beam computed tomography scans (axial and parasagittal sections) of 150 patients rehabilitated with pterygoid implants were retrospectively analysed to determine the horizontal and vertical angulations in relation to the hamular line and FH plane, respectively. Results: The results showed horizontal buccal and palatal safe angulations of 20.8° ± 7.6° and -20.7° ± 8.5° in relation to the hamular line. Maximum and minimum vertical angulations of 61.6° ± 7.0° and 37.2° ± 10.3° were observed, with a mean of 49.8 ± 8.1 in relation to FH plane. The post-operative scans showed that around 98% of the implants placed along the hamular line were successfully engaging the pterygoid plate. Discussion: Comparing with the results of previous studies, this study concludes that when implants are placed along the hamular line, they are more likely to engage the centre of the pterygomaxillary junction resulting in an excellent prognosis of pterygoid implants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.