Extramaxillary Zygomatic Implants



Extensive bone atrophy present in patients who need to be rehabilitated with zygomatic implants, associated with rehabilitation performed through a classical surgical technique and, depending on the maxillary anatomy, may cause prosthetic screw exit to be located on the palate and predispose to aesthetic, phonetic, and oral hygiene complaints. Therefore, an extra-maxillary technique for insertion of zygomatic implants included in the All-on-4® Hybrid and All-on-4® Extramaxilla concepts was developed in order to reduce the palatal emergence of the prosthetic screws and, therefore, optimally position the buccal cantilever with a straighter prosthetic base. Here, the main focus is to create patient comfort and a prosthesis that is easy to clean while always maintaining the desired prosthetic support. This chapter describes the diagnosis, treatment planning, and treatment concepts that underpin the All-on-4 Extramaxilla concept.


All-on-4 Extramaxilla Extra-sinus Zygomatic implant Zygoma implant NobelZygoma implant 


  1. 1.
    Maló P, Rangert B, Nobre M. “All-on-4®” immediate function concept with Branemark System implants for completely edentulous mandibles: a retrospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2003;5:S2–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Maló P, Rangert B, Nobre M. “All-on-4®” immediate function concept with Brånemark System implants for completely edentulous maxilla: a 1-year retrospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2005;7:S88–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Krekmanov L, Kahn M, Rangert B, Lindström H. Tilting of posterior mandibular and maxillary implants of improved prosthesis support. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2000;15:405–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Malo P, Nobre Mde A, Lopes A. Immediate rehabilitation of completely edentulous arches with a four-implant prosthesis concept in difficult conditions: an open cohort study with a mean follow-up of 2 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012;27:1177–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maló P, Nobre M, Lopes A. Immediate loading of ‘All-on-4’ maxillary prostheses using trans-sinus tilted implants without sinus bone grafting: a retrospective study reporting the 3-year outcome. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2013;6:273–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Maló P, de Araújo Nobre M, Lopes A, Rodrigues R. Preliminary report on the outcome of tilted implants with longer lengths (20–25 mm) in low-density bone: one-year follow-up of a prospective cohort study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015;17(Suppl 1):e134–42. Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maló P, Nobre Mde A, Lopes I. A new approach to rehabilitate the severely atrophic maxilla using extramaxillary anchored implants in immediate function: a pilot study. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;100:354–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Maló P, Nobre M, Lopes A, Francischone C, Rigolizzo M. Three-year outcome of a retrospective cohort study on the rehabilitation of completely edentulous atrophic maxillae with immediately loaded extra-maxillary zygomatic implants. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2012;5:37–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maló P, Nobre Mde A, Lopes A, Ferro A, Moss S. Five-year outcome of a retrospective cohort study on the rehabilitation of completely edentulous atrophic maxillae with immediately loaded zygomatic implants placed extra-maxillary. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2014;7:267–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Maló P, de Araújo Nobre M, Lopes A, Ferro A, Moss S. Extramaxillary surgical technique: clinical outcome of 352 patients rehabilitated with 747 zygomatic implants with a follow-up between 6 months and 7 years. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015;17(Suppl 1):e153–62. Epub 2013 Sep 4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    de Araújo Nobre M, Maló P, Gonçalves I. Evaluation of clinical soft tissue parameters for extramaxillary zygomatic implants and conventional implants in All-on-4 hybrid rehabilitations: short-term outcome and proposal of clinical recommendations for intervention in recall appointments. Implant Dent. 2015;24:267–74. Scholar
  12. 12.
    Agliardi EL, Romeo D, Panigatti S, de Araújo Nobre M, Maló P. Immediate full-arch rehabilitation of the severely atrophic maxilla supported by zygomatic implants: a prospective clinical study with minimum follow-up of 6 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017;46:1592–9. Epub 2017 Jun 24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Corvello Corvello PC, Montagner A, Batista FC, Smidt R, Shinkai RS. Length of the drilling holes of zygomatic implants inserted with the standard technique or a revised method: a comparative study in dry skulls. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2011;39:119–23. Scholar
  14. 14.
    Davó R, Malevez C, Rojas J, Rodríguez J, Regolf J. Clinical outcome of 42 patients treated with 81 immediately loaded zygomatic implants: a 12- to 42-month retrospective study. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2008;1:141–50.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brånemark PI, Grodahl K, Ohrnell LO, et al. Zygoma fixture in the management of advanced atrophy of the maxilla: technique and long-term results. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 2004;38:70–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bedrossian E, Stumpel LJ III. Immediate stabilization at stage II of zygomatic implants: rationale and technique. J Prosthet Dent. 2001;86:10–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ujigawa K, Kato Y, Kizu Y, Tonogi M, Yamane GY. Three dimensional finite elemental analysis of zygomatic implants in craniofacial structures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;36:620–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nkenke E, Hahn M, Lell M, Wiltfang J, Schultze-Mosgau S, Stech B, et al. Anatomic site evaluation of the zygomatic bone for dental implant placement. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2003;14:72–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chow J, Hui E, Lee PK, Li W. Zygomatic implants-protocol for immediate occlusal loading: preliminary report. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006;64:804–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Becktor JP, Isaksson S, Abrahamsson P, Sennerby L. Evaluation of 31 zygomatic implants and 74 regular dental implants used in 16 patients for prosthetic reconstruction of the atrophic maxilla with cross-arch fixed bridges. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2005;7:159–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lanza DC, Kennedy DW. Adult rhinosinusitis defined. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997;117:1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Atieh MA, Alsabeeha NH, Faggion CM Jr, Duncan WJ. The frequency of peri-implant diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontol. 2013;84:1586–98. Epub 2012 Dec 13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Maló P, Nobre M, Lopes A. The rehabilitation of completely edentulous maxillae with different degrees of resorption with four or more immediately loaded implants: a 5-year retrospective study and a new classification. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2011;4:227–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Maló P, de Araújo Nobre M, Borges J, Almeida R. Retrievable metal ceramic implant-supported fixed prostheses with milled titanium frameworks and all-ceramic crowns: retrospective clinical study with up to 10 years of follow-up. J Prosthodont. 2012;21:256–64. Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kim Y, Oh TJ, Misch CE, et al. Occlusal considerations in implant therapy: clinical guidelines with biomechanical rationale. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005;16:26–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kinsel RP, Lin D. Retrospective analysis of porcelain failures of metal ceramic crowns and fixed partial dentures supported by 729 implants in 152 patients: patient-specific and implant-specific predictors of ceramic failure. J Prosthet Dent. 2009;101:388–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Maló ClinicLisbonPortugal
  2. 2.Oral Surgery DepartmentMaló ClinicLisbonPortugal
  3. 3.Research and Development DepartmentMaló ClinicLisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations