RESUMEN
Introduction: Prosthetic rehabilitation with implants in the atrophic edentulous maxilla often requires a bone augmentation procedure to enable implant placement and integration. However, rigid anchorage can also be achieved using long zygomatic implants. The aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical outcomes of rehabilitation of atrophic posterior maxillary ridges with zygomatic implants using the zygomatic success code (ZSC) and derive the success grade for the procedure based on the observed results. Materials and Methods: A total of eight implants were placed in an extrasinus technique based on the zygomatic anatomy-guided approach. The following were evaluated postoperatively - primary stability, maxillary sinus pathology, soft-tissue healing and prosthetic offset. The ZSC score was calculated, and success grading was given with ZSC based on Aparacio et al.,'s guidelines. Results: One implant had Grade 1 mobility and partial maxillary sinus opacification, 25% (n = 2) revealed a mild recession exposing the implant head and 12.5% (n = 1) showed significant recession up to 7 mm. The prosthetic offset of zygomatic implants was scored -1 for all eight implants. Five implants were given a success code of 1/1/1/1 and a success grade of Grade I, two implants were given code 1/1/2/1 with Grade II and one implant 2/2/3/1 and grade III. The results imply that zygomatic implants can be a successful option in maxillary rehabilitation. Discussion: The zygomatic implants, as a graft less and promising solution to the rehabilitation of atrophied maxillary arches, have excellent surgical outcomes with varied advantages.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The first aim of this study is to compare the outcomes in rehabilitating the atrophic maxilla using zygomatic implants (ZIs) and regular implants (RIs) using the classical zygomatic technique (CZT) versus the zygomatic anatomy-guided approach (ZAGA). The second goal of this paper is to propose a standardized system to report rhinosinusitis diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-two consecutive zygomatic patients operated on from 1998 to 2002 and 80 consecutive zygomatic patients operated on from 2004 to October 2009 were selected. All included patients were in a maintenance program. Survival rates (SRs) of ZI and RI were recorded. Implants were individually tested using Periotest® (Periotest value [PTv], Siemens AG, Bensheim, UK). Sinus health was radiographically and clinically assessed according to Lund-Mackay system and Lanza and Kennedy survey recommended by Task Force on Rhinosinusitis for research outcomes. A satisfaction questionnaire (Oral Health Impact Profile for assessing health-related quality of life in Edentulous adults) and different anatomical measurements were also performed. RESULTS: No significant differences (p = .602) were observed with respect to SR between the two groups (95.12% vs 96.79%). Significant differences (p = .000) were found comparing measurements of ZI head distance to the alveolar crest (5.12 ± 2.38 mm vs 2.92 ± 2.30 mm). With the CZT, more palatal emergence of ZI was observed. PTv gave significantly greater stability for the CZT compared with the ZAGA group in both measurements (-4.38 ± 1.75 vs -2.49 ± 4.31, p = .000; -4.94 ± 1.46 vs -3.11 ± 5.06, p = .000). Lund-Mackay score was significantly lower for the ZAGA group (2.38 ± 3.86 vs 0.56 ± 1.26, p = .042). Statistically significant difference (p = .047) regarding the percentage of patients with no signs or symptoms of rhinosinusitis (Lanza and Kennedy test negative and Lund-Mackay score zero) was observed between groups (54.55% vs 76.25%, p = .047). CONCLUSIONS: Both procedures had similar clinical outcomes with respect to implant survival. The ZAGA concept is able to immediately rehabilitate the severely atrophic maxillae, minimizing the risk of maxillary sinus-associated pathology. Moreover, less bulky, more comfortable, and easy to clean prostheses are achieved.