ArticleBMC oral health2024
Biomechanical evaluation of six zygomatic implants versus four zygomatic implants combined with dental implants in the treatment of different maxillary defects.
Article in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fatigue and FEA of zygomatic implant systems in bilateral maxillary defects.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Investigation of the stresses on pterygoid and zygomatic implants used in atrophic maxilla rehabilitation by finite element analysis.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to compare the biomechanics of six zygomatic implants (ZIs) and dental implants (DIs) combined with four ZIs with different maxilla defects.
methodsThree-dimensional constructs of the ZIs, DIs human skulls, and maxillary prostheses were created using SolidWorks Software (Version 2015, Dassault Systems SolidWorks Corporation, Waltham, MA, USA). Eight finite element models of the skull with four different alveolar defect types (0-4) were constructed. Type 0: No defect; Type 1: Bilateral posterior defects; Type 2: Right posterior defect; Type 3: Anterior and left posterior defects; Type 4: Bilateral posterior and anterior defects. In two models with the same defect type (for defect types 0-2), six ZIs or two DIs combined with four ZIs were inserted into the maxilla. Six ZIs were inserted in the maxilla models with defect types 3 and 4. Vertical (150 N) and masseteric (300 N) loads were simulated on the prosthesis. The maximum Von Mises stress in the implants/surrounding bone and bone deformation were evaluated.
resultsThe maximum Von Mises stresses in bone/implant were found highest in the defect type 2 model with four ZIs combined with two DIs. The lowest maximum Von Mises stress for bone was detected in the model with defect type 0 and with six ZIs.
conclusionAmong the four types of defects, the posterior unilateral defect caused the highest stress value.
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.