Skip to main content

Table 5 Zygomatic implant success report

From: Long-term treatment outcomes with zygomatic implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Study

Zygomatic implant number

Success

Failure to meet success

Patient number

Follow-up

Follow-up range

Pellegrino et al.a 2020

Atrophic

Oncologic

38

35

89.8% (CI: 60.4–97.7%) (n = 34)

96.7% (CI:79.2–99.5%) (n = 34)

Mucositis: 13.1% (3.7–41%)

Mucositis: 39.7% (9.7–91.7%)

Extra-oral swelling (n = 1)

10

10

39.9

 ± 19.5

Davo and Pons 2015

68

98.5% (n = 67)

Unfavourable position (n = 1)

14

60

N/A

Malo et al. 2014

92

98.8% (n = 91)

PPD > 4 mm (n = 23)

39

60

N/A

Davo, Malevez and Pons. 2013

69

98.55% (n = 68)

NR

42

60

N/A

Yates et al. 2013

43

86.05% (n = 37)

Recession of 2–4 threads (n = 6)

25

72

48–72

Agliardi et al. 2017

42

100% (n = 42)

NR

15

85

73–91

Miglioranca et al. 2012

40

97.5% (n = 39)

NR

21

96

Not reported

Fortin 2017

107

100% (n = 107)

Successful treatment of infection by implant apicoectomy. (not included in success data by study)

58

100.8

60–156

Cosola et al. 2021

67

46.3% (n = 36)

28 ZI (41.8%) experienced infective complications defined as sinusitis, oro-antral fistula or soft tissue infection. Early neurologic pain following treatment in 8 ZI (11.9%) in 5 patients

33

141.6

109–198

  1. NR not reported
  2. aReported as two groups in the same study