This case report describes the care given to a 58-year-old male patient with severe upper jaw atrophy. The treatment strategy involved utilizing zygomatic implants in conjunction with endosteal implants to rehabilitate both the maxilla and mandible. Temporary prostheses were used during the healing phase, followed by the fabrication and placement of final prostheses. The utilization of zygomatic implants offers advantages such as immediate stabilization and function without the need for extensive bone grafting. This approach not only reduces treatment time and costs but also enhances patient outcomes. Furthermore, guided surgical techniques are increasingly employed to ensure precise implant placement, optimizing prosthetic support.

UNASSIGNED: To systematically review existing scientific literature to determine, compare and evaluate the sinus complication and survival rates of quad zygoma against two zygomatic implants with combination of two regular implants in atrophic maxilla in adults.
UNASSIGNED: Review was performed in accordance with preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines and registered in PROSPERO-CRD42023392721 Electronic databases like PubMed, Google scholar and EBSCO host were searched from 2000 to December 2022 for studies reporting treatment of Atrophic maxilla with either quad zygoma or two zygomatic implants in combination with two regular implants. Quality assessment was evaluated using Cochrane risk of bias-2 tool for randomized controlled trials (RCT). The risk of bias summary graph and risk of bias summary applicability concern was plotted using RevMan software version 5.3. The odds ratio (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used as summary statistic measure with random effect model and p value < 0.05 as statistically significant.
UNASSIGNED: Eleven studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in qualitative synthesis, of which only nine studies were suitable for meta-analysis. The pooled estimate through the odds ratio 0.59 signifies that the quad zygomatic implants on an average has 0.59 (0.18-1.93) times or odds of developing sinus complications while the SMD signifies that better survival rate (SR) on an average is 0.35 (- 0.61 to 1.30) times more by two zygomatic implants with combination of two regular implants as compared to quad zygomatic implants (p > 0.05). Publication bias through the funnel plot showed asymmetric distribution with systematic heterogeneity.
UNASSIGNED: Two zygomatic implants in combination with two regular implants provides better survival rate and less sinus complications compared to quad zygoma in atrophic maxilla. Despite the high SR observed, there is a need to conduct more randomized controlled clinical trials to examine their efficacy in comparison with other techniques.

Background/Objectives: There is a need for alternative approaches to full-arch rehabilitation of atrophic maxillae. The aim of this short case series was to describe the technique and assess the short term-outcomes of atrophic maxillae rehabilitation using transnasal implants in conjunction with zygomatic implants. Methods: Three female patients (average age: 62 years) presenting comorbidities and atrophic maxillae preventing the insertion of standard maxillary anchored implants received a full-arch fixed prosthesis supported by transnasal implants together with zygomatic implants, using the ad modum all-on-4 concept. Patients were followed during the functional osseointegration period. Primary outcome measures were prosthetic and implant survival based on function. Secondary outcome measures were complication parameters (biological and mechanical), plaque and bleeding levels, and probing pocket depths > 4 mm. Results: No implant failures were registered, and all prostheses remained in function. The only complication was a fracture of a provisional crown that was resolved. Plaque and bleeding scores were mild during the follow-up period. Conclusions: The present manuscript describes the use of extra-long transnasal implants in combination with zygomatic implants in immediate function for full-arch fixed prosthetic rehabilitation of atrophic maxillae, with the objective of promoting more research into this relatively recent technique. More studies are needed to validate the technique.

OBJECTIVE: This non-interventional study investigates variations in the type and frequency of late complications linked to novel zygomatic implant designs, installed adhering to the Zygoma Anatomy-Guided Approach (ZAGA) concept, over an extended follow-up period of at least 3 years.
METHODS: Consecutive patients presenting indications for treatment with ZIs were treated according to ZAGA recommendations. Implants were immediately loaded. The ORIS success criteria for prosthetic offset, stability, sinus changes and soft-tissue status were used to evaluate the outcome.
RESULTS: Twenty patients were treated. Ten patients received two ZIs and regular implants; one received three ZIs plus regular implants, and nine received four ZIs. Fifty-nine ZIs were placed: thirty-six (61%) Straumann ZAGA-Flat implants and twenty-three (39%) Straumann ZAGA-Round implants. Four patients (20%) presented earlier sinus floor discontinuities. Fifteen patients (75%) had prior sinus opacities. Nineteen patients were followed for between 38 and 53 months (mean 46.5 months). One patient dropped out after 20 months. When comparing pre-surgical CBCT with post-surgical CBCT, 84.7% of the sites presented identical or less sinus opacity; nine locations (15%) showed decreased, and another nine increased (15%) post-surgical sinus opacity. Fifty-three ZIs (89.8%) maintained stable soft tissue. Six ZIs had recessions with no signs of infection. ZIs and prosthesis survival rate was 100%.
CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights the effectiveness of ZAGA-based zygomatic implant rehabilitations using Round and Flat designs. Despite patient number constraints, minimal changes in the frequency of late complications from the 1-year follow-up were observed. 100% implant and prosthesis survival rate over a mean follow-up of 46.5 months is reported.

OBJECTIVE: Prosthetics for patients after oncological resection of the upper jaw is a complex problem associated with the physiological and anatomical separation of the oral cavity and the nasal/paranasal region. This study reports the clinical results of the use of the zygomatic implants for prosthetic rehabilitation in patients with maxillectomy due to upper jaw tumors.
METHODS: The study included 16 patients who underwent prosthetic rehabilitation using a zygomatic implant after maxillectomy period from 2021 to 2023. After the tumor was removed, immediate surgical obturators were placed. Main prosthetic rehabilitation was performed 6-12 months after tumor removal, but before that, a temporary obturator was made and used. Six-twelve months after tumor resection, 1-4 zygomatic implants were inserted into the zygomatic bone unilaterally or bilaterally. A total of 42 zygomatic implants were installed, 2 of which were unsuccessful and were removed in 1 patient. The implants were placed using the surgical guide, which was planned and prepared digitally.
RESULTS: No postsurgical complications were seen, and the patients were discharged from the hospital after 7-10 days. The patients were able to return to a normal diet (hard food) after just 7 days following surgery, with no further complaints regarding function or pain, apart from the residual edema caused by the intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of prostheses fixed on zygomatic implants in patients with maxillary defects is an effective method of prosthodontic rehabilitation in complex clinical cases after maxillectomy.

BACKGROUND: Atrophic edentulous maxilla is a debilitating condition caused by the progressive and irreversible bone resorption following loss of teeth, that results in bone of inadequate volume and density. This makes conventional implant therapy extremely challenging without complex reconstructive procedures. Several techniques such as sinus augmentation, short implants, and tilted implants have been used for the rehabilitation of the atrophic maxilla. In recent years, zygomatic implants have emerged as a graftless rehabilitation technique. However, few studies compare zygomatic-implant fixed rehabilitation with other fixed rehabilitation techniques. The existing body of evidence on zygomatic implants is largely based on clinical and disease-oriented outcomes.
METHODS: A network meta-analysis (NMA) will be conducted in order to compare the effectiveness of zygomatic-implant fixed rehabilitation with the other rehabilitation techniques. Experimental and observational studies comparing different implant-assisted fixed rehabilitation in adults with atrophic maxilla will be included. The primary and secondary outcomes will be patient\'s satisfaction and quality of life respectively. Additional outcomes include the implant\'s survival/success, and biological and prosthetic complications. An electronic search will be performed through various databases for articles in English and French, without time limits. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for randomized controlled trials, and ROBINS-I for non-randomized and observational studies. Two independent reviewers will screen the titles and abstracts and extract data. Any discrepancy between reviewers will be discussed and resolved through consensus or with the help of a third reviewer. Pairwise meta-analyses will be performed using a random effects model. I2, τ2, transitivity, subgroup/meta-regression analyses will assess and explain heterogeneity and distribution of effect modifiers. A network plot will be created to connect the different interventions directly and indirectly. Interventions will be ranked using the surface under cumulative ranking curve. Confidence in the results of the NMA will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).
CONCLUSIONS: This study will be the first to assess the effectiveness of zygomatic-implant fixed rehabilitation for the atrophic maxilla using NMA. The evidence obtained will aid clinical decision-making and will advance the knowledge of the rehabilitation techniques for the atrophic maxilla.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO CRD42023353303.

UNASSIGNED: Zygomatic implants are an effective solution for rehabilitation of edentulous atrophic maxillae. However, the conventional technique of zygomatic implant placement is invasive, requires a longer healing period and is economically cumbersome. Therefore, the flapless technique of insertion of zygomatic implants using dynamic navigation system has been introduced. This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of flapless insertion of zygomatic implants using dynamic navigation to the conventional flap technique.
UNASSIGNED: The study participants were divided into two groups: Group A (n = 20) included patients treated by flapless insertion of zygomatic implants using dynamic navigation and Group B (n = 20) included patients treated with zygomatic implants using the flap technique. An analysis of the effectiveness of the implants was done using the concept of quality-adjusted prosthesis years, and an analysis of the costs was done by evaluating the treatment costs at each step. The data were collected, and analysis was done using IBM SPSS software. The Kruskal-Wallis rank-sum test was employed to analyse variations in costs and effects between the two groups.
UNASSIGNED: The study showed that the distribution of costs varies across both the categories of the procedure. Group B shows lesser cost-effectiveness as compared to Group A.
UNASSIGNED: The technique of flapless insertion of zygomatic implants is cost-effective. However, further studies considering factors such as time and cost of productivity evaluating the cost-effectiveness should be conducted.

In the present study, anatomical assessment of zygomaticofacial foramina (ZFFs) and zygomatic canals communicating with ZFFs were performed using cadaver micro-computed tomography images. It was suggested that all ZFFs were located above the jugale (Ju)-zygomaxillare (Zm) line, which is the reference line connecting the Ju and Zm, and most were located in the zygomatic body area (ZBA). The anteroposterior position of the ZFF in the ZBA was within a middle to posterior region and was most often located slightly posteriorly in males and closer to the middle of the region in females. The mean distance from the Ju-Zm line to the ZFF in the ZBA was 12.36 mm (standard deviation [SD] 1.52 mm) in males and 11.48 mm (SD 1.61 mm) in females. In zygomatic canals communicating with ZFFs, most zygomatic canals were type I canals, communicating from the zygomaticoorbital foramen and harboring the zygomaticofacial nerve, and the others were type II canals, communicating from the zygomaticotemporal foramen and located near the posterior margin of the frontal process. These results provide useful anatomical information for preventing nerve injury during surgical procedures for zygomatic implant treatment.

The immediate loading protocol has become increasingly popular due to the progressive growth in demand for a reduction in treatment times. The possibility of applying this protocol would depend on certain important factors. The application of the digital workflow mentioned in the protocol guarantees rapidity, precision, and esthetics. This report aims to describe a fully digital workflow using a dual scan impression technique to fabricate immediate fixed complete dentures (FCDs) for zygomatic and standard implants. A 58-year-old female patient requested treatment for her severely atrophic maxilla, and four unrehabilitated implants in the mandible. After proper diagnosis and planification, four zygomatic implants and two standard implants were placed. During the surgery, transmucosal abutments were placed on all implants. After suturing, the positions of the implants were recorded using a stereophotogrammetric technique, creating a standard tessellation (STL) file. In the lower arch, the second phase of the surgery was carried out: the transmucosal abutments were placed, and then the implant positions were recorded in the same way. The soft tissues were rescanned after suturing with an intraoral scanner (IOS), and all STL files were aligned to obtain the virtual final models. The pre-design after virtual modifications was aligned with the definitive models. The provisional prostheses were milled and placed after six hours after the surgery, and the definitive prostheses were placed six months after the surgery. The dual scan technique used obtained a precise fit for both the provisional and definitive FCDs. This technique might be an effective and reliable alternative for the fabrication of immediate and definitive screw-retained FCDs in a completely digital workflow. The time taken for scanning and fabrication was reduced, and the clinician\'s and patient\'s satisfaction were improved.

BACKGROUND: Presently, the management of patients with maxilla bone defects of the Cawood V or VI class is achieved using zygomatic or individual implants or through augmentation of the bone. For zygomatic implants, the ORIS criteria represent the most common factor in helping practitioners register success rates. The zygomatic anatomy-guided approach (ZAGA)and zygomatic orbital floor (ZOF) are factors that are crucial to examining the anatomy of a particular patient before the procedure. The aim of thisarticle is to find the statistical relationship between the abovementioned terms and other factors.
METHODS: A total of 81 patients underwent zygomatic implant procedures in different configurations. The ORIS, ZAGA, and ZOF parameters were compared with other factors such as type of surgery, sex, age, and the anatomy of the zygomatic bone.
RESULTS: Most patients in this article were classified as ZAGA Class 2. The relationships between type of surgery and ZAGA classification, and ZAGA and sinus/maxilla zygomatic implant localization were statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: The ZAGA and ZOF scales are practical and valuable factors that should be taken into account before surgery, whereas to date, criteria better than the ORIS scale have not been described in terms of the success of zygomatic implants. The ZOF scale might omit perforation of the orbit because this parameter warns a practitioner to be aware of the anatomy of the orbit.