ArticleClinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry2025
Rehabilitating Patients with Atrophic Maxillae via Zygomatic Implants.
Article in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Significant maxillary atrophy poses a considerable obstacle for oral restoration with standard dental implants because of insufficient bone supply. Zygomatic implants provide alternative treatments without a graft by being secured into the sturdy zygomatic bone, enabling support for prosthetic restoration. Thus, zygomatic implants were proposed in this case report as a substitute for costly and lengthy grafting techniques for rehabilitating patients with insufficient bone. Case Presentation: We describe a 62-year-old male who was diagnosed with maxillary atrophy and who underwent a rehabilitation protocol involving zygomatic implants. Two bilateral zygomatic implants were planned as free-hand surgical procedures because of the lack of a supporting structure to stabilize the surgical template. Prostheses were then placed after 48 hours, and a radiographic follow-up occurred at 24 months. Regular check-ups and proper oral hygiene were maintained. The clinical data and radiographs for the control treatment were obtained throughout the two years following treatment. Patients achieved functional and aesthetic rehabilitation with no major complications reported during the follow-up period. High levels of patient satisfaction and prosthetic function were observed. Conclusion: This case report highlights the effective rehabilitation of a severely atrophic maxilla using quad zygomatic implants, achieving immediate function and aesthetics with no major complications over two years. Compared with traditional bone grafting, the graftless approach is less invasive, leading to faster recovery and greater patient satisfaction.
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.