Tubero pterygoid implants- a boom for atrophied maxillary ridges: Systematic review and meta analaysis

Vaishali Jamdade; Kannan Venugopal; Sidhartha S P Behera; Anusha Rani; Ashwin Hiremath; Amrita Das

doi:10.53730/ijhs.v6nS5.8958

Authors

Vaishali Jamdade Reader, Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Mahatma Gandhi Dental College and Hospital, Jaipur
Kannan Venugopal Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, PMS College of Dental Science and Research, Golden Hills, Vattapara, Trivandrum, Kerala
Sidhartha S P Behera
drsidentb@gmail.com
Reader, Dept of Prosthodontics, Sree Sai Dental College & Research Institute, Srikakulam, NTRUHS, Andhra Pradesh
Anusha Rani Post Graduate, Dept of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Jaipur Dental College, Jaipur
Ashwin Hiremath MDS, OMFS, FAM, Consultant Maxillofacial Surgeon at Redymed Health Care, Belgaum, Karnataka, India
Amrita Das Senior lecturer, Department of Periodontology and Implantology, Dr. HSRSM dental college, Hingoli, Maharashtra, India

Keywords:

Tubero-Pterygoid, Atrophic Posterior Maxilla, Implants

Abstract

Introduction: Dental prosthetic rehabilitation based on Osseo integrated implants is a well-established and highly predictable treatment modality. Hence we aimed to systematic literature review to analyze clinical outcomes of tubero-pterygoid / Pterygoid implant for the treatment of patients with atrophic posterior maxillae and to provide clinical recommendations for this dental implant technique. Material and methods: Online data was collected from the search engines of EBSCO, Pubmed, Google Scholar, Scopus to identify literature presenting clinical outcomes of tubero-pterygoid implants in the treatment of patients with atrophic posterior maxillae. The study articles were collected that from Jan 1999 to Feb 2021. Based on the PRISMA guidelines the meta analysis was performed. Results: From 331 only 6 were finalized. All studies were retrospective in nature and were classified with a poor level of evidence. A total of 634 patients received 1.893 tubero- Pterygoid implants, with a mean implant survival rate of 94.87%. The mean prevalence of implant failure was 0.056 with a 95% CI of 0.04 to 0.077. Conclusion: It can be concluded that tubero-pterygoid implants can be successfully used in patients with atrophic posterior maxilla.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Papaspyridakos P, Mokti M, Chen CJ, Benic GI, Gallucci GO, Chronopoulos V. Implant and prosthodontic survival rates with implant fixed complete dental prostheses in the edentulous mandible after at least 5 years: a systematic review. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2013; 16: 705-5

Brånemark P-I, Breine U, Adell R, Hansson BO, Lindstrom J, Ohlsson A. Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses I: experimental studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1969; 3: 81–100.

Peñarrocha M, Viña JA, Carrillo C, Peñarrocha M. Rehabilitation of reabsorbed maxillae with implants in buttresses in patients with combination syndrome. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012; 70: e322-e330.

Moraschini V, Poubel LAC, Ferreira VF, Barboza ESP. Evaluation of survival and success rates of dental implants reported in longitudinal studies with a follow-up period of at least 10 years: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2015; 44: 377–388.

Al-Nsour MM, Chan HL, Wang HL. Effect of the platform-switching technique on preservation of peri-implant marginal bone: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012; 27: 138–45.

Curi MM, Cardoso CM, Ribeiro KCB. Retrospective study of pterygoid implants in the atrophic posterior maxilla: Implant and prosthesis survival rates up to 3 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2015; 30: 378–383.

Balshi SF, Wolfinger GJ, Balshi TJ. Analysis of 164 titanium oxide-surface implants in completely edentulous arches for fixed prosthesis anchorage using the pterygomaxillary region. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005: 20: 946–952.

Tulasne JF. Implant treatment of missing posterior dentition. In: Al-brektson T, Zarb G, editors. The Branemark osseointegrated implant. Chicago, IL: Quintessence; 1989. p. 103–15.

Tulasne JF. Osseointegrated fixtures in the pterygoid region. In: Worthington P, Branemark PI, editors. Advanced osseointegration surgery, applications in the maxillofacial region. Chicago, IL: Quintessence;1992. p. 182–8.

Rodrıguez X, Lucas-Taulé E, Elnayef B, Altuna P, Gargallo-Albiol J, Peñarrocha MD, Hernandez- Alfaro F. Anatomical and radiological approach to pterygoid implants: a cross-sectional study of cone beam computed tomography examinations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2015; 45(5): 636-40.

Yamakura T, Abe S, Tamatsu Y, Rhee S, Hashimoto M, Ide Y. Anatomical study of the maxillary tuberosity in Japanese men. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll 1998; 39: 287-92.

Lee SP, Paik KS, Kim MK. Anatomical study of the pyramidal process of the palatine bone in relation to implant placement in the posterior maxilla. J Oral Rehabil 2001; 28: 125-32.

Rodriguez X, Rambla F, De Marcos Lopez L, Mendez V, Vela X, Jimenez Garcia J. Anatomical study of the pterygomaxillary area for implant placement: cone beam computed tomographic scanning in 100 patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014; 29: 1049-52.

Balshi TJ, Wolfinger GJ, Slauch RW, Balshi SF. Branemark System implant lengths in the pterygomaxillary region: a retrospective comparison. Implant Dent 2013; 22: 610-12.

Balshi FS, Wolfinger GJ, Slauch RW, Balshi TJ. A Retrospective comparison of implants in the pterygomaxillary region: implant placement with 2 stage, 1 stage and guided: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013; 28: 184-189.

Graves S. The pterygoid plate implant: a solution for restoring the posterior maxilla. Int J Periodont Rest Dent 1994; 13: 513-523.

Penarrocha M, Carrillo C, Bonorat A, Penarrocha M. Retrospective study of 68 implants placed in the ptertygomaxillary region using drills and osteotomes. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009; 24: 720-726.

Bidra AS, Huynh-Ba G. Implants in the pterygoid region: a systematic review of the literature. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011; 40: 773–781.

Laney WR, ed: Glossary of oral and maxillofacial implants. Chicago, IL: Quintessence 2007: 182-188.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg 2010; 8: 336–41.

Cawood JL, Howell RA. A classification of the edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1988; 17:232-236.

Rodríguez X, Mendez V, Vela X, Segalá M. Modified surgical protocol for placing implants in the ptetygomaxillary region: clinical and radiologic study of 454 implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012; 27: 1547-1553.

Valerón JF, Valerón PF. Long-term results in placement of screw-type implants in the pterrygomaxillary-pyramidal region. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2007; 22: 195-200.