ArticleJournal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists2025
Assessment of different treatment alternatives for patients with total maxillectomy.
Article in Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-Specific Subperiosteal Implants for Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review Across Indications, from Established Full-Arch Use to Emerging Single-Tooth and Oncologic Applications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Rehabilitation of the Severely Atrophic Maxilla with Subperiosteal Implants: A Biomechanical and Decision Analysis of Material and Configuration Choices.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Biomechanical comparison of titanium and Y-TZP subperiosteal implants in atrophic maxilla: a finite element study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Comparison of biomechanical performance of custom implants with different designs under functional load: a finite element analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Assessment of different treatment alternatives for patients with total maxillectomy.Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2025Article
- Article
- CBCT-Based Anthropometric Evaluation of Edentulous Alveolar Crest Lengths.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Non-Linear Biomechanical Evaluation and Comparison in the Assessment of Three Different Piece Dental Implant Systems for the Molar Region: A Finite Element Study.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the biomechanical advantages of combining zygoma and partial subperiosteal implants for maxillary reconstruction in severely atrophic maxillae, offering potential solutions to the challenges posed by traditional reconstruction methods. MATERIAL AND
methodsA finite element analysis used a craniofacial model simulating a totally resected maxilla. Four treatment scenarios (SCs) were evaluated: SC-1, the quad zygoma approach; SC-2, two zygoma implants (ZIs) and a one-piece subperiosteal implant (SI); SC-3, two ZI and a two-piece SI; and SC-4, four ZI and a one-piece SI. Stress distributions on bone, implants, abutments, and metal frameworks were compared under occlusal forces.
resultsFor the simulated bone regions under vertical and oblique forces, SC-4 values were higher than SC-1, while SC-2 and SC-3 values were comparable for p
conclusionsOverall, this study suggests that combining zygoma and partial subperiosteal implants may be a promising approach for reconstructing severely atrophic maxillae. These implants may offer improved biomechanical properties compared to ZIs alone.
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.