ArticleBMC oral health2025
Biomechanical evaluation of conventional, zygomatic, zygomatic bone anchored subperiosteal and maxilla anchored subperiosteal implants applied totally edentulous maxilla: finite element stress analysis.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-Specific Subperiosteal Implants for Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review Across Indications, from Established Full-Arch Use to Emerging Single-Tooth and Oncologic Applications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Rehabilitation of the Severely Atrophic Maxilla with Subperiosteal Implants: A Biomechanical and Decision Analysis of Material and Configuration Choices.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Biomechanical evaluation of prosthetic framework materials in subperiosteal implants: a finite element analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to evaluate the stress distribution under occlusal forces by using finite element analysis (FEA) to compare conventional, zygomatic, and differently designed subperiosteal implants (SI) in edentulous atrophic maxilla.
methodsA 3D model of an edentulous atrophic maxilla was reconstructed from CT scans. Three models were simulated: Model 1 with zygoma and conventional implants, Model 2 with apertura piriformis and subperiosteal implants extending to the zygomaticomaxillary buttress, and Model 3 with apertura piriformis and subperiosteal implants covering the zygomatic buttress. Mechanical properties were assigned according to the literature; 150 Newton (N) force per tooth was applied for occlusal loading, and 100 N force was applied for oblique loading.
resultsWhen the highest tensile (Pmax) and compressive (Pmin) stresses in the bone under vertical and oblique forces were examined, the highest stress was observed in Model 1, and the lowest was observed in Model 3. The von Mises stress values observed in the metal substructure were the highest in Model 1 and the lowest in Model 3. The von Mises stress in the abutments and implants was highest in Model 3 and lowest in Model 1. When the subperiosteal implant screws were examined, more von Mises stress was observed in the subperiosteal implant screws used in Model 3 than in those used in Model 2. Among the three different treatment options applied in the atrophic maxilla, the highest stress in the bone occurred in the conventional and zygomatic implants, and the lowest stress occurred in the subperiosteal implant with a zygomatic bone anchor.
conclusionsDifferent types and designs of implants may be alternatives to advanced surgical methods in the rehabilitation of atrophic maxillary lesions. This study underscores the importance of implant and bone design in choosing optimal anchorage zones, particularly in cases of severe bone loss in the edentulous maxilla. In light of these findings, we recommend implant systems that are specially developed for appropriate rehabilitation in the atrophic edentulous maxilla.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.