TY - JOUR
T1 - Indications for implant-supported rehabilitation of the posterior atrophic maxilla
T2 - A multidisciplinary consensus among experts in the field utilising the modified Delphi method
AU - Testori, Tiziano
AU - Clauser, Tommaso
AU - Rapani, Antonio
AU - Artzi, Zvi
AU - Avila-Ortiz, Gustavo
AU - Barootchi, Shayan
AU - Bressan, Eriberto
AU - Chiapasco, Matteo
AU - Cordaro, Luca
AU - Decker, Ann
AU - De Stavola, Luca
AU - Di Stefano, Danilo Alessio
AU - Felice, Pietro
AU - Fontana, Filippo
AU - Grusovin, Maria Gabriella
AU - Jensen, Ole T.
AU - Le, Bach T.
AU - Lombardi, Teresa
AU - Misch, Craig
AU - Pikos, Michael
AU - Pistilli, Roberto
AU - Ronda, Marco
AU - Saleh, Muhammad H.
AU - Schwartz-Arad, Devorah
AU - Simion, Massimo
AU - Taschieri, Silvio
AU - Toffler, Michael
AU - Tozum, Tolga F.
AU - Valentini, Pascal
AU - Vinci, Raffaele
AU - Wallace, Stephen S.
AU - Wang, Hom Lay
AU - Wen, Shih Cheng
AU - Yin, Shi
AU - Zucchelli, Giovanni
AU - Zuffetti, Francesco
AU - Stacchi, Claudio
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© (2023), (Quintessenz Verlags-GmbH). All Rights Reserved.
PY - 2024
Y1 - 2024
N2 - Purpose: To establish consensus-driven guidelines that could support the clinical decision-making process for implant-supported rehabilitation of the posterior atrophic maxilla and ultimately improve long-term treatment outcomes and patient satisfaction. Materials and methods: A total of 33 participants were enrolled (18 active members of the Italian Academy of Osseointegration and 15 international experts). Based on the available evidence, the development group discussed and proposed an initial list of 20 statements, which were later evalu- ated by all participants. After the forms were completed, the responses were sent for blinded ana- lysis. In most cases, when a consensus was not reached, the statements were rephrased and sent to the participants for another round of evaluation. Three rounds were planned. Results: After the first round of voting, participants came close to reaching a consensus on six statements, but no consensus was achieved for the other fourteen. Following this, nineteen statements were rephrased and sent to participants again for the second round of voting, after which a consensus was reached for six statements and almost reached for three statements, but no consensus was achieved for the other ten. All 13 statements upon which no consensus was reached were rephrased and included in the third round. After this round, a consensus was achieved for an additional nine statements and almost achieved for three statements, but no consensus was reached for the remaining statement. Conclusion: This Delphi consensus highlights the importance of accurate preoperative planning, taking into consideration the maxillomandibular relationship to meet the functional and aesthetic requirements of the final restoration. Emphasis is placed on the role played by the sinus bony walls and floor in providing essential elements for bone formation, and on evaluation of bucco- palatal sinus width for choosing between lateral and transcrestal sinus floor elevation. Tilted and trans-sinus implants are considered viable options, whereas caution is advised when placing pterygoid implants. Zygomatic implants are seen as a potential option in specific cases, such as for completely edentulous elderly or oncological patients, for whom conv ntional alternatives are unsuitable.
AB - Purpose: To establish consensus-driven guidelines that could support the clinical decision-making process for implant-supported rehabilitation of the posterior atrophic maxilla and ultimately improve long-term treatment outcomes and patient satisfaction. Materials and methods: A total of 33 participants were enrolled (18 active members of the Italian Academy of Osseointegration and 15 international experts). Based on the available evidence, the development group discussed and proposed an initial list of 20 statements, which were later evalu- ated by all participants. After the forms were completed, the responses were sent for blinded ana- lysis. In most cases, when a consensus was not reached, the statements were rephrased and sent to the participants for another round of evaluation. Three rounds were planned. Results: After the first round of voting, participants came close to reaching a consensus on six statements, but no consensus was achieved for the other fourteen. Following this, nineteen statements were rephrased and sent to participants again for the second round of voting, after which a consensus was reached for six statements and almost reached for three statements, but no consensus was achieved for the other ten. All 13 statements upon which no consensus was reached were rephrased and included in the third round. After this round, a consensus was achieved for an additional nine statements and almost achieved for three statements, but no consensus was reached for the remaining statement. Conclusion: This Delphi consensus highlights the importance of accurate preoperative planning, taking into consideration the maxillomandibular relationship to meet the functional and aesthetic requirements of the final restoration. Emphasis is placed on the role played by the sinus bony walls and floor in providing essential elements for bone formation, and on evaluation of bucco- palatal sinus width for choosing between lateral and transcrestal sinus floor elevation. Tilted and trans-sinus implants are considered viable options, whereas caution is advised when placing pterygoid implants. Zygomatic implants are seen as a potential option in specific cases, such as for completely edentulous elderly or oncological patients, for whom conv ntional alternatives are unsuitable.
KW - diagnostic procedure
KW - implant dentistry
KW - lateral window technique
KW - pterygoid implants
KW - sinus floor ele- vation
KW - transcrestal sinus floor elevation
KW - zygomatic implants
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85188422162&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
C2 - 38501401
AN - SCOPUS:85188422162
SN - 2631-6420
VL - 17
SP - 89
EP - 100
JO - International Journal of Oral Implantology
JF - International Journal of Oral Implantology
IS - 1
ER -