ArticleCase reports in dentistry2026
Subperiosteal Implant Application in Full-Jaw Reconstruction for Severely Atrophic Ridge: A Case Report.
Article in Case reports in dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Subperiosteal Implant Application in Full-Jaw Reconstruction for Severely Atrophic Ridge: A Case Report.Case reports in dentistry · 2026Article
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
Background: In cases of severe jaw atrophy, conventional implant-supported prosthetic rehabilitation is often limited by insufficient bone volume and the need for extensive grafting procedures. These challenges can restrict prosthetic design and compromise functional outcomes. Customized subperiosteal implants, designed to fit directly over the existing bone surface, offer an alternative approach that enables full-arch prosthetic reconstruction without bone augmentation. Methods: A patient with severe maxillary and mandibular atrophy underwent full-arch rehabilitation using a customized subperiosteal implant fabricated through CAD/CAM technology based on three-dimensional imaging. Although the implant framework was digitally designed, the prosthetic phase utilized conventional impression techniques to accurately capture soft tissue and abutment details. The definitive prosthesis was fabricated using a traditional laboratory workflow focusing on optimal occlusion, esthetics, and patient comfort. A structured clinical timeline, detailed surgical protocol, and short-term clinical and radiographic follow-up were documented to ensure reproducibility and objective outcome assessment. Results: The customized subperiosteal framework provided stable support for the final prosthesis. Conventional impression methods allowed precise adaptation of the restoration, minimal chairside adjustment, and satisfactory esthetic and functional outcomes. At 6-month follow-up, no implant mobility, soft-tissue exposure, infection, or prosthetic complications were observed. Clinical examination demonstrated healthy peri-implant soft tissue and stable radiographic findings. The patient reported high satisfaction with mastication, speech, and comfort. Conclusion: Customized subperiosteal implants, even when combined with conventional prosthetic techniques, can reliably support full-arch restorations in patients with severely resorbed jaws. This approach merges digital surgical design with traditional prosthodontic principles, providing predictable, efficient, and patient-centered rehabilitation when conventional implant placement is not feasible. Interdisciplinary planning and strict quality-control protocols are essential to prevent design errors and optimize outcomes.
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.