Clinical assessment of pterygoid and anterior implants in the atrophic edentulous maxilla: a retrospective study

doi:10.7518/hxkq.2021.03.007

Abstract

Abstract: Objective

This study aims to evaluate the short-term clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction of anterior and pterygoid implants in the rehabilitation of edentulous maxilla with posterior atrophy.

Methods

Given a minimum follow-up of 1 year, 25 patients with fixed maxillary rehabilitation over anterior and pterygoid implants were enrolled in this retrospective study. The implant survival rates, peri-implant soft tissue status (including probing depth, modified sulcus bleeding index, and plaque index), marginal bone loss, and patient satisfaction were measured.

Results

The survival rates for anterior and pterygoid implants at 1-year follow-up were 96.5% and 97.8%, respectively (P>0.05). No statistically significant difference in probing depth, modified sulcus bleeding index, and plaque index was observed between the two types of implants (P>0.05). The marginal bone losses of anterior implants were 0.62 mm± 0.44 mm (mesial) and 0.61 mm± 0.40 mm (distal), and those of pterygoid implants were 0.64 mm± 0.46 mm (mesial) and 0.68 mm± 0.41 mm (distal) mm. These results showed no statistical difference in mesial and distal sites (P>0.05). Patients indicated a high degree of satisfaction with the full-arch prostheses supported by anterior and pterygoid implants.

Conclusion

For the edentulous maxilla with posterior atrophy, full-arch fixed prostheses supported by anterior and pterygoid implants has an acceptable short-term clinical outcome and excellent patient satisfaction. It may be considered as a predictable and feasible method for maxillary rehabilitation.

Key words: pterygoid implant, pterygomaxillary region, edentulous maxilla, marginal bone loss

CLC Number:

R 783.4

Wu Jin, Liu Kun, Li Ming, Zhu Zhijun, Tang Chunbo. Clinical assessment of pterygoid and anterior implants in the atrophic edentulous maxilla: a retrospective study[J]. West China Journal of Stomatology, 2021, 39(3): 286-292.

Figures/Tables 6

Fig 1

Fig 2

Tab 1

Tab 2

Tab 3

Fig 3

References 25

1	Adell R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U, et al. Long-term follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1990, 5(4): 347-359.
2	Jemt T, Stenport V, Friberg B. Implant treatment with fixed prostheses in the edentulous maxilla. Part 1: implants and biologic response in two patient cohorts restored between 1986 and 1987 and 15 years later[J]. Int J Prosthodont, 2011, 24(4): 345-355.
3	Brånemark PI, Adell R, Albrektsson T, et al. An experimental and clinical study of osseointegrated implants penetrating the nasal cavity and maxillary sinus[J]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 1984, 42(8): 497-505.
4	Breine U, Brånemark PI. Reconstruction of alveolar jaw bone. An experimental and clinical study of immediate and preformed autologous bone grafts in combination with osseointegrated implants[J]. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg, 1980, 14(1): 23-48.
5	Tulasne JF. The Brånemark osseointegrated implant[M]. Chicago: Quintessence, 1989: 103-115.
6	Khayat P, Nader N. The use of osseointegrated implants in the maxillary tuberosity[J]. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent, 1994, 6(4): 53-61.
7	Cucchi A, Vignudelli E, Franco S, et al. Minimally invasive approach based on pterygoid and short implants for rehabilitation of an extremely atrophic maxilla: case report[J]. Implant Dent, 2017, 26(4): 639-644.
8	Rodríguez X, Méndez V, Vela X, et al. Modified surgical protocol for placing implants in the pterygomaxillary region: clinical and radiologic study of 454 implants[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2012, 27(6): 1547-1553.
9	龚婷, 孙应明, 陶睿. 上颌结节三维方向骨量及与第三磨牙关系的CBCT研究[J]. 临床口腔医学杂志, 2019, 35(11): 675-678.
	Gong T, Sun YM, Tao R. Three-dimensional bone mass of maxillary tuberosity and its relationship with third molars using CBCT[J]. J Clin Stomatol, 2019, 35(11): 675-678.
10	Malo P, de Araújo Nobre M, Lopes A, et al. A longitudinal study of the survival of All-on-4 implants in the mandible with up to 10 years of follow-up[J]. J Am Dent Assoc, 2011, 142(3): 310-320.
11	Slade GD, Spencer AJ. Development and evaluation of the oral health impact profile[J]. Community Dent Health, 1994, 11(1): 3-11.
12	Slade GD. Derivation and validation of a short-form oral health impact profile[J]. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 1997, 25(4): 284-290.
13	Balshi TJ, Wolfinger GJ, Balshi SF 2nd. Analysis of 356 pterygomaxillary implants in edentulous arches for fixed prosthesis anchorage[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1999, 14(3): 398-406.
14	Graves SL. The pterygoid plate implant: a solution for restoring the posterior maxilla[J]. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 1994, 14(6): 512-523.
15	Tulasne JF. Osseointegrated fixtures in the pterygoid region. Applications in the maxillofacial region[M]. Chicago: Quintessence, 1992: 182-188.
16	Balshi TJ, Lee HY, Hernandez RE. The use of pterygomaxillary implants in the partially edentulous patient: a preliminary report[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1995, 10(1): 89-98.
17	Bahat O. Osseointegrated implants in the maxillary tuberosity: report on 45 consecutive patients[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 1992, 7(4): 459-467.
18	Krekmanov L. Placement of posterior mandibular and maxillary implants in patients with severe bone deficiency: a clinical report of procedure[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2000, 15(5): 722-730.
19	Balshi SF, Wolfinger GJ, Balshi TJ. Analysis of 164 titanium oxide-surface implants in completely edentulous ar-ches for fixed prosthesis anchorage using the pterygoma-xillary region[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2005, 20(6): 946-952.
20	Valerón JF, Valerón PF. Long-term results in placement of screw-type implants in the pterygomaxillary-pyramidal region[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2007, 22(2): 195-200.
21	Peñarrocha M, Carrillo C, Boronat A, et al. Retrospective study of 68 implants placed in the pterygomaxillary region using drills and osteotomes[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2009, 24(4): 720-726.
22	Curi MM, Cardoso CL, Ribeiro Kde C. Retrospective study of pterygoid implants in the atrophic posterior maxilla: implant and prosthesis survival rates up to 3 years[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2015, 30(2): 378-383.
23	Araujo RZ, Santiago Júnior JF, Cardoso CL, et al. Clinical outcomes of pterygoid implants: systematic review and Meta-analysis[J]. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 2019, 47(4): 651-660.
24	Balshi TJ, Wolfinger GJ, Slauch RW, et al. Brånemark system implant lengths in the pterygomaxillary region: a retrospective comparison[J]. Implant Dent, 2013, 22(6): 610-612.
25	Balshi TJ, Wolfinger GJ, Slauch RW, et al. A retrospective comparison of implants in the pterygomaxillary region: implant placement with two-stage, single-stage, and guided surgery protocols[J]. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 2013, 28(1): 184-189.

植入的设计方案	例数	设计原因及存留情况
4颗前部+2颗翼上颌区种植体	18	最常见的设计，即“All-on-6”。其中，1例患者的1颗翼上颌区种植体在永久修复前失败
5颗前部+2颗翼上颌区种植体	1	患者咬合力较大且对颌为7-7全牙弓种植固定修复，植入更多的前部种植体以保持稳固
6颗前部+2颗翼上颌区种植体	2	患者咬合力较大且对颌为7-7全牙弓种植固定修复，植入更多的前部种植体以保持稳固。其中，1例患者在第一次手术后，由于未能自觉控制吸烟行为，且口腔卫生维护不佳，6颗前部种植体中有4颗失败。对患者进行健康宣教并强制戒烟，3个月后重新补种5颗前部种植体
4颗前部+1颗翼上颌区种植体	2	手术时保留了一侧的上颌第二磨牙，为确定临时修复体的颌位关系提供参考，后期永久修复时拔除
5颗前部+1颗翼上颌区种植体	1	一侧的上颌骨后部骨量充足，植入常规种植体而非翼上颌区种植体
6颗前部+1颗翼上颌区种植体	1	一侧的上颌骨后部骨量充足，植入常规种植体而非翼上颌区种植体

参数	前部种植体（n=113）	翼上颌区种植体（n=46）	P值
PD/mm	2.18±0.44	2.30±0.54	0.191
mSBI	0.07±0.29	0.13±0.40	0.321
PLI	0.99±0.56	1.16±0.76	0.332
MBL/mm
近中	0.62±0.44	0.64±0.46	0.986
远中	0.61±0.40	0.68±0.41	0.961