Maxilla

PurposeTo assess the outcome [zygomatic implant (ZI) survival] and complications of the original surgical technique (OST) and an Anatomy-Guided approach (AGA) in the placement of ZI in patients with severely atrophic maxillae.MethodsTwo independent reviewers conducted an electronic literature search from January 2000 to August 2022. The inclusion criteria were articles reporting at least five patients with severely atrophic edentulous maxilla undergoing placement OST and/or AGA, with a minimum of 6 months of follow-up. Number of patients, defect characteristics, number of ZI, implant details, surgical technique, survival rate, loading protocol, prosthetic rehabilitation, complications, and follow-up period were compared.ResultsTwenty-four studies comprised 2194 ZI in 918 patients with 41 failures. The ZI survival rate was 90.3-100% in OST and 90.4-100% in AGA. Probability of complications with ZI with OST was as follows: sinusitis, 9.53%; soft tissue infection, 7.50%; paresthesia, 10.78%; oroantral fistulas, 4.58%; and direct surgical complication, 6.91%. With AGA, the presenting complications were as follows: sinusitis, 4.39%; soft tissue infection, 4.35%; paresthesia, 0.55%; oroantral fistulas, 1.71%; and direct surgical complication, 1.60%. The prevalence of immediate loading protocol was 22.3% in OST and 89.6% in the AGA. Due to the heterogeneity of studies, statistical comparison was only possible after the descriptive analysis.ConclusionsBased on the current systematic review, placing ZI in severely atrophic edentulous maxillae rehabilitation with the OST and AGA is associated with a high implant survival rate and surgical complications within a minimum of 6 months follow-up. Complications, including sinusitis and soft tissue infection around the implant, are the most common. The utilization of immediate loading protocol is more observed in AGA than in OST.

PurposeAccurate knowledge of greater palatine foramen (GPF) and greater palatine canal (GPC) anatomy is necessary to avoid injury to the greater palatine artery (GPA) when performing a variety of anesthesiologic, dental or surgical procedures. The aim of this paper was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of literature on the anatomy and localization of bony structures associated with the GPA, namely the GPF and GPC.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science databases. Seventy-five studies were included in the meta-analysis (n = 22,202 subjects).ResultsThe meta-analysis showed that the GPF is positioned 17.21 mm (95% CI = 16.34-18.09 mm) from the posterior nasal spine, 2.56 mm (95% CI = 1.90-3.22 mm) from the posterior border of the hard palate, 46.24 mm (95% CI = 44.30-48.18 mm) from the anterior nasal spine, 15.22 mm (95% CI = 15.00-15.43 mm) from the midline maxillary suture, 37.32 mm (95% CI = 36.19-38.45 mm) from the incisive foramen, and opposite the third maxillary molar (M3) in 64.9% (58.7-70.7%) of the total population.ConclusionAn up-to-date, comprehensive analysis of GPF and GPC clinical anatomy is presented. The results from this evidence-based anatomical study provides a unified set of data to aid clinicians in their practice.

The purpose of this study was to compare the difference of alveolar bone remodeling between the adolescents and adults in the maxillary incisor area during retraction. This retrospective study included 72 female patients who needed moderate anchorage to correct the bimaxillary protrusion. Subjects were further divided into the minor group (n = 36, 11-16 years old) and adult group (n = 36, 18-35 years old). Digital lateral cephalography and cone beam CT scanning were taken in each patient before (T0) and after treatment (T1). Cephalometry was conducted to assess incisor retraction, while alveolar bone thickness (ABT), alveolar bone distance (ABD), and alveolar bone area (ABA) were detected to assess changes in the alveolar bone. No difference in the inclination of upper incisors was observed at both T0 and T1 between two groups. Changes in the alveolar bone showed a similar tendency with bone apposition on the labial side and bone resorption on the palatal side in both groups. Less increase in the labial ABT (T1-T0) and more decrease in the palatal ABT (T1-T0) was found in the adult group, leading to less total ABT in the adult group. Higher reduction in ABD (T1-T0) was found in the adult group. Moreover, more decrease in the ABA (T1-T0) was found in the adult group. Adult patients have less alveolar bone support after treatment when compared with young adolescents. Orthodontists should take the age into consideration to reduce the potential periodontal risks during the treatment planning.

IntroductionAugmented reality (AR) enables interactive learning in real-world environments. In dental radiography education, AR offers a promising tool to enhance students' clinical skills by allowing them to simulate and practice procedures before engaging with actual patients. Repeated practice in an AR environment can reinforce theoretical knowledge and improve practical competence. Understanding dental anatomy and surrounding bone structures is essential for achieving accurate radiographic techniques, and 3D reconstructions from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) aid this learning.ObjectiveTo develop and evaluate an AR application designed to support the learning of periapical radiographic techniques.MethodsAn AR application was developed using Digital Imaging and Communication in Medicine (DICOM) images, which were converted into Standard Tessellation Language (STL) format. Meshmixer software was employed to construct a three-dimensional patient model, which was then used to create visual simulations of periapical radiographic projections based on established literature. The resulting images were integrated into the M3DMIX AR platform for visualization. Usability was assessed by 44 undergraduate dental students using a questionnaire based on the System Usability Scale (SUS).ResultsThe AR application achieved a mean usability score of 89.26 on the SUS, indicating a high level of user satisfaction. Students reported that the AR tool positively influenced their learning experience and enhanced their understanding of radiographic techniques.ConclusionThe AR application developed in this study demonstrated strong potential as an effective educational tool for teaching periapical radiographic techniques. Its high usability rating suggests that AR can significantly contribute to improving dental radiography education.