Reliability of All on 4 Using 2 Zygomatic and 2 Conventional Implants vs All on 4 Implants for Rehabilitation of Maxilla
Study Details
Study Description
Brief Summary
Oral rehabilitation by dental implants in the severely atrophic maxilla often represents a challenge. To overcome this difficulty, bone augmentation procedures such as sinus augmentation, guided bone regeneration (GBR), or distraction osteogenesis have been used to obtain adequate bone height and width for proper three-dimensional implant placement. To avoid surgical morbidity and shorten treatment length, alternative methods such as short or tilted implants, as well as zygomatic implants (ZIs),have been proposed and have shown promising outcomes.
| Condition or Disease | Intervention/Treatment | Phase |
|---|---|---|
|
N/A |
Detailed Description
Placement of dental implants in the pterygo-maxillary region provides adequate posterior bone support for the prosthesis which permits better distribution of masticatory forces without the need of sinus floor augmentation, onlay and inlay grafts, split crest technique, or osteogenic distraction. This allows rehabilitating patients with satisfactory full arch fixed maxillary prosthesis, which is usually spanned from second molar to contralateral second molar tooth.
The purpose of the present study is to compare the Reliability of all on four by 2 zygomatic implants with 2 conventional implant in anterior region versus all on four approach by conventional implant for the rehabilitation of the atrophied maxilla in terms of survival rates and improving the quality of patient's life and involved complication with maxillary sinus.
Study Design
Arms and Interventions
| Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
|---|---|
| Experimental: zygomatic implant patients receiving 2 zygomatic implants with 2 conventional implant in anterior region |
Procedure: zygomatic implant
2 zygomatic implants and 2 anterior conventional implant
Other Names:
|
| Active Comparator: conventional implant patients receiving 4 conventional implant 2 in anterior region and 2 in posterior region with immediate loading |
Procedure: conventional implant
patients will receive 4 conventional dental implant
Other Names:
|
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
- change of function of the masticatory muscles [baseline & 6 month after the delivery of the prothesis]
measuring muscles activtiy of masseter and temporalis muscles by electromyography
Secondary Outcome Measures
- Implant primary stability [baseline Immediate after implantation]
The implant initial stability will be directly measured after implant insertion using the resonance frequency analysis technique by osttel device
Other Outcome Measures
- Biologic complication and implant survival rate [baseline and sixth months]
Any biological complication as sinusitis, fenestration, orbital insults, failure of the implant, are going to be assessed radiographically by the CBCT
Eligibility Criteria
Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
-
Patients with severely atrophic edentulous upper arch (Cawood class IV, V, VI) that could not be restored with other type of treatment.
-
Patients who had at least 8-12 mm vertical bone height in anterior maxilla to allow installation of at least 2 conventional implants.
Exclusion Criteria:
-
Patients with any systemic disease that might interfere with dental implants placement and/or osseointegration e.g. uncontrolled diabetes, hypertension and osteoporosis, etc.
-
Heavy smoker (> 20 cigarettes daily) and patients with history para-functional habits (e.g. clenching or bruxism, etc.) were also excluded.
-
Intraoral pathological lesion, related to maxilla, maxillary sinus and zygoma.
Contacts and Locations
Locations
No locations specified.Sponsors and Collaborators
- Cairo University
Investigators
- Study Chair: Mohamed a. Atef, professor, Cairo University
Study Documents (Full-Text)
None provided.More Information
Publications
None provided.- 10/11/2021