Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41732067›Full record

ArticleClinical oral implants research2026

1st Global Consensus for Clinical Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of the Edentulous Maxilla: Patient and Cross-Disciplinary Expert Single-Round Surveys.

Guo-Hao Lin, Giulia Brunello, Ronald E Jung, Ina Kopp, Frank Schwarz, Hom-Lay Wang, Franz J Strauss

Abstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical oral implants research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Guo-Hao LinDepartment of Orofacial Sciences, University of California San Francisco School of Dentistry, San Francisco, California, USA.
Giulia BrunelloDepartment of Oral Surgery, University Hospital of Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1436-0085
Ronald E JungClinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-2055-1320
Ina KoppAWMF-Institut für Medizinisches Wissensmanagement, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Frank SchwarzDepartment of Oral Surgery, Implantology and Oral Medicine, Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5515-227X
Hom-Lay WangDepartment of Periodontics & Oral Medicine, University of Michigan School of Dentistry, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4238-1799
Franz J StraussClinic of Reconstructive Dentistry, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-5832-7327

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo gather perspectives from patients and cross-disciplinary experts on treatment practices and outcomes in managing the edentulous maxilla to inform a structured consensus process and highlight areas for future research. MATERIALS AND

methodsAn 18-item single-round survey was distributed in November 2024 with 68 patients and 68 cross-disciplinary experts. Participation was voluntary, anonymous, incentive-free, and required informed consent. Consensus was defined as > 75% and ≤ 95% agreement or disagreement, and strong consensus as > 95% agreement or disagreement.

resultsResponse rates were 60.3% among patients, and 30.9% among cross-disciplinary experts. Consensus or strong consensus was achieved by patients on 15 statements across nine items and by cross-disciplinary experts on 15 statements across eight items. Items reaching consensus included the use of cone-beam computed tomography, preference for fixed full-arch prostheses, major treatment outcomes, need for hard tissue augmentation, home care regimens, dental implant lifespan, procedure difficulty, cost-effectiveness, and patient-reported outcomes. Both groups also highlighted the need for further research on full-arch implant rehabilitation of the maxilla.

conclusionFindings from both surveys inform the development of clinical practice guidelines in treating the edentulous maxilla by providing valuable perspectives from patients and cross-disciplinary experts. Areas lacking consensus illustrate real-world variations in treatment approaches, highlight knowledge gaps in the current literature, and reveal important differences among patient expectations, expert opinions, and available evidence.

Indexed as

Jaw, EdentulousMaxillaPractice Guidelines as TopicAgedCone-Beam Computed TomographyDental ImplantsDental Prosthesis, Implant-SupportedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesDental Implantsdental implantspatient participationstakeholder participationsurvey

Identifiers

PMID41732067
PMCPMC12930135

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.