ArticleHead & face medicine2025
Innovative landing zones for one-piece, rigidly fixated patient-specific subperiosteal implants in dental rehabilitation of severe maxillary and midfacial defects.
Article in Head & face medicine, 2025. 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.
- 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
- Maintenance of Custom-Made Subperiosteal Implants: A Narrative Review of Indirect Evidence and Preliminary Clinical Considerations.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of the studyThis study demonstrates and investigates the feasibility of a novel approach for dental rehabilitation in complex maxillary and midfacial defects, often resulting in severe pseudo-class III relationships. It explores the use of patient-specific subperiosteal implants (IPS Implants
methodsPatients with significant maxillary and midfacial bone loss due to postablative defects were included in our case series, with or without irradiation. From 100 patients, 13 required design modifications based on FEM analysis, involving implant anchorage to the lateral skull base and/or pterygoid process. Eight patients received single-sided lateral skull base extensions; one posttraumatic case required bilateral extensions. In five of 13 cases, additional extensions to the pterygoid process were implemented. One case needed both bilateral skull base and pterygoid extensions, while two had bilateral pterygoid and a single-sided skull base extension. Outcomes assessed included primary stability, prosthodontic restoration, complications, and soft tissue management.
resultsNo implant failures occurred during follow-up, with functional stability established immediately post-insertion. Prosthodontic restoration succeeded in all cases, with no stability loss or periimplantitis. Mucositis was noted around posterior posts in some instances, and one bar required trimming due to soft tissue changes, without affecting implant function. One implant had to be removed, due to chronic pain.
conclusionsPatient-specific IPS 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.