Zygomatic Implants Literature Review and a Clinical Case Involving Bone Grafting and the Importance of the Use of Multiunit ELEMENT<sup>®</sup> Transepithelial Abutments

Iñaki Mayo Fajo; Antonio Macías Lloret

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12

Review Article |

| Peer-Reviewed

Zygomatic Implants Literature Review and a Clinical Case Involving Bone Grafting and the Importance of the Use of Multiunit ELEMENT^® Transepithelial Abutments

Iñaki Mayo Fajo^*

, Antonio Macías Lloret

Published in International Journal of Dental Medicine (Volume 11, Issue 2)

Received: 19 September 2025 Accepted: 11 October 2025 Published: 31 October 2025

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Zygomatic implants, originally designed by Dr. Branemark in 1989, are implants which could have 45 to 55 -degree heads of angulation, 4.2 or 4.5 millimeters in diameter at their widest point and measuring between 30 and even 50 or 60 millimeters in length. They are inserted from the palatal aspect of the alveolar process, following the zygomatic-alveolar crest until they are anchored in the body of the malar bone. In maxillomandibular patients, they enter directly into the body of the malar bone. These implants offer the surgeon an alternative when planning implant-supported prosthetic and rehabilitation treatment, especially in patients with severely atrophied upper jaws, where bone grafting is impossible or has previously failed. And also, a reliable and predictable option for immediate loading prosthesis, which is relevant for the comfort, confidence and aesthetics of the patient. The objective of this article is to present the surgical protocol for placing zygomatic implants and a robust review of the current literature on the clinical evolution of these implants and their different techniques. And no less important, to show the advantages, purpose and benefits of using curved and more anatomical transepithelial abutments with a multiunit platform when we need to place an immediate load and definitive full arch prosthesis.

Published in	International Journal of Dental Medicine (Volume 11, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12
Page(s)	49-57
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Zygomatic Implants, Transepithelial Abutments, Guided Bone Regeneration

References

[1]	White GS. Treatment of the edentulous patient. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2015; 27: 265-72.
[2]	Pi-Urgell J, Revilla-Gutiérrez V, Gay-Escoda C. Rehabilitation of atrophic maxilla: A review of 101 zygomatic implants. Med Oral Pathol Oral Cir Bucal. 2008; 13: 363-70.
[3]	Aparicio C, Ouazzani W, Garcia R, Arevalo Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2006; 8: 114-22.
[4]	Aparicio C, Ouazzani O, Hatano N. The use of zygomatic implants for prosthetic rehabilitation of the severely resorbed maxilla. Periodontol 2000. 2008; 47: 162-71.
[5]	Brånemark PI. Surgery and fixture installation. Zygomaticus fixture clinical procedures. 1st Gothenburg, Sweden: Nobel Biocare; 1998.
[6]	Stella JP, Warner MR. Sinus slot technique for simplification and improved orientation of zygomaticus dental implants: A technical note. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2000; 15: 889-93.
[7]	Molinero-Mourelle P, Baca-Gonzalez L, Gao B, Saez-Alcaide LM, Helm A, Lopez-Quiles J. Surgical complications in zygomatic implants: A systematic review. Med Oral Pathol Oral Cir Bucal. 2016; 21: 751-7.
[8]	Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altmane DG, The PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Int J Surg. 2010; 8: 336-41.
[9]	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.
[10]	Davó R. ZI placed with a 2-stage procedure: A 5 year retrospective study. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2009; 2: 247-56.
[11]	Candel-Martí E, Carrillo-García C, Penarrocha-Oltra ˜ D, Penarrocha-Diago ˜ M. Rehabilitation of the atrophic posterior maxilla with zygomatic implants: Review. J Oral Implantol. 2012; 38: 653-7.
[12]	Aparicio C, Ouazzani W, Aparicio A, Fortes V, Muela R, Pascual A, et al. Extrasinus ZI: Three years experience from a new surgical approach for patients with pronounced buccal concavities in the edentulous maxilla. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2010; 12: 55-61.
[13]	Bedrossian E. Rehabilitation of the edentulous maxilla with the zygoma concept: A 7-year prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010; 25: 1213-21.
[14]	D'Agostino A, Trevisiol L, Favero V, Pessina M, Procacci P, Nocini PF. Are zygomatic implants associated with maxillary sinusitis? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016; 74: 1562-73.
[15]	Davó R, Malevez C, López-Orellana C, Pastor-Bevia F, Rojas J. Sinus reactions to immediately loaded zygomatic implants: A clinical and radiological study. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2008; 1: 53-60.
[16]	Davó R, Malevez C, Rojas J, Rodríguez J, Regolf J. Clinical outcome of 42 patients treated with immediately loaded zygomatic implants: A 12- to 42-month retrospective study. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2008; 1: 1-10.
[17]	Fernández Olarte H, Gómez Delgado A, Trujillo Saldarriaga S, Castro Núnez ˜ J. Inferior meatal antrostomy as a prophylactic maneuver to prevent sinusitis after zygomatic implant placement using intrasinusal technique. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015; 30: 862-7.
[18]	Maló P, Araujo M, 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.
[19]	Rodríguez-Chessa J, Sergio Olate S, Duque Netto H, Shibli J, Moraes M, Mazzonetto R. Treatment of atrophic maxilla with zygomatic implants in 29 consecutive patients. Int J Clin Exp Med 2014; 7: 426-30.
[20]	Zwahlen RA, Grätz KW, Oechslin CK, Studer SP. Survival rate of zygomatic implants in atrophic or partially resected maxillae prior to functional loading: A retrospective clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006; 21: 413-20.
[21]	Petruson B. Sinuscopy in patients with titanium implants in the nose and sinuses. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 2004; 38: 86-93.
[22]	Jung JH, Choi BH, Zhu SJ, Lee SH, Huh JY, You TM, et al. The effects of exposing dental implants to the maxillary sinus cavity on sinus complications. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006; 102: 602-5.
[23]	Jaffin RA, Berman CL. The excessive loss of Branemark fixtures in type IV bone: A 5-year analysis. J Periodontol. 1991; 62: 2-4.
[24]	García Rodríguez JA, García Sánchez JE, Gobernado Serrano M, Mensa Pueyo J, Lorente Guerrero J, Ortega del Alamo P, et al. Diagnosis and antimicrobial treatment of sinusitis. Rev Esp Quimioterap. 2003; 16: 239-51.
[25]	Chrcanovic BR, Albrektsson T, Wennerberg A. Survival and complications of zygomatic implants: An updated systematic review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016; 74: 1949-64, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2016.06.166
[26]	Goiato MC, Pellizzer EP, Moreno A, Gennari-Filho H, dos Santos DM, Santiago JF Jr, et al. Implants in the zygomatic bone for maxillary prosthetic rehabilitation: A systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014; 43: 748-57.
[27]	Basu S, Georgalas C, Kumar BN, Desai S. Correlation between symptoms and radiological findings in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis: An evaluation study using the Sinonasal Assessment Questionnaire and Lund-Mackay grading system. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2005; 262: 751-4.
[28]	Donado M, Martínez JM. Oral surgery. Pathology and technique. 4th ed. Barcelona, Spain: Elsevier Masson; 2014. p. 406-17.
[29]	Chrcanovic BR, Nogueira MH, Abreu G. Survival and complications of zygomatic implants: A systematic review. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 17: 81-93.
[30]	Hicok KC, Du Laney TV, Zhou YS, Halvorsen YD, Hitt DC, Cooper LF, et al. Human adipose-derived adult stem cells produce osteoid in vivo. Tissue Eng 2004; 10: 371-80.
[31]	Farré-Guasch E, Martí-Pagè C, Hernádez-Alfaro F, Klein-Nulend J, Casals N. Buccal fat pad, an oral access source of human adipose stem cells with potential for osteochondral tissue engineering: An in vitro study. Tissue Eng Part C Methods. 2010; 16: 1083-94.
[32]	De Moraes EJ. The buccal fat pad flap: An option to prevent and treat complications regarding complex zygomatic implant surgery. Preliminary report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2012; 27: 905-10.
[33]	Penarrocha-Oltra ˜ D, Alonso-González R, Pellicer-Chover H, Aloy-Prósper A, Penarrocha-Diago ˜ MA. Closure of oroantral communication with buccal fat pad after removing bilateral failed zygomatic implants: A case report and 6-month follow-up. J Clin Exp Dent. 2015; 7: 159-62.
[34]	Hernando J, Gallego L, Junquera L, Villarreal P. Oroantral communications. A retrospective analysis. Med Oral Pathol Oral Cir Bucal. 2010; 3: 499-503.
[35]	Chow J, Wat P. A new method to eliminate the risk of maxillary sinusitis with zygomatic implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010; 25: 1233-40. 36. Sato FR, Sawazaki R, Berretta D, Moreira RW, Vargas PA, de Almeida OP. Aspergillosis of the maxillary sinus associated with a zygomatic implant. J Am Dent Assoc. 2010; 141: 1231-5.
[36]	One-Abutment at One-Time in Posterior Edentulism: A Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisMay 2023, The Journal of craniofacial surgery 34(8).
[37]	One Abutment One Time: A Multicenter, Prospective, Controlled, Randomized Study December 2020 International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH) 17(24): 9453 José Vicente Ríos-SantosGregorio González, Gregorio GonzálezPedro JOSE Lazaro Pedro, JOSE LazaroShow, Mariano Herrero Climent.
[38]	Linkevicius T, Apse P. Biologic width around implants. An evidence-based review. Stomatologija. 2008; 10(1): 27-35.
[39]	Saadoun AP. Current trends in implant design, surface modification and implant-related biological parameters. Int J Esthet Dent. 2019; 14(3): 226-246.
[40]	Glauser R, Sailer I, Wohlwend A, Studer S, Schibli M. Experimental zirconia abutments for implant-supported single-tooth restorations in aesthetically demanding regions: 4-year results of a prospective clinical study. Int J Prosthodont. 2004; 17(3): 285-290.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Fajo, I. M., Lloret, A. M. (2025). Zygomatic Implants Literature Review and a Clinical Case Involving Bone Grafting and the Importance of the Use of Multiunit ELEMENT® Transepithelial Abutments. International Journal of Dental Medicine, 11(2), 49-57. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Fajo, I. M.; Lloret, A. M. Zygomatic Implants Literature Review and a Clinical Case Involving Bone Grafting and the Importance of the Use of Multiunit ELEMENT® Transepithelial Abutments. Int. J. Dent. Med. 2025, 11(2), 49-57. doi: 10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Fajo IM, Lloret AM. Zygomatic Implants Literature Review and a Clinical Case Involving Bone Grafting and the Importance of the Use of Multiunit ELEMENT® Transepithelial Abutments. Int J Dent Med. 2025;11(2):49-57. doi: 10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12,
  author = {Iñaki Mayo Fajo and Antonio Macías Lloret},
  title = {Zygomatic Implants Literature Review and a Clinical Case Involving Bone Grafting and the Importance of the Use of Multiunit ELEMENT® Transepithelial Abutments},
  journal = {International Journal of Dental Medicine},
  volume = {11},
  number = {2},
  pages = {49-57},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijdm.20251102.12},
  abstract = {Zygomatic implants, originally designed by Dr. Branemark in 1989, are implants which could have 45 to 55 -degree heads of angulation, 4.2 or 4.5 millimeters in diameter at their widest point and measuring between 30 and even 50 or 60 millimeters in length. They are inserted from the palatal aspect of the alveolar process, following the zygomatic-alveolar crest until they are anchored in the body of the malar bone. In maxillomandibular patients, they enter directly into the body of the malar bone. These implants offer the surgeon an alternative when planning implant-supported prosthetic and rehabilitation treatment, especially in patients with severely atrophied upper jaws, where bone grafting is impossible or has previously failed. And also, a reliable and predictable option for immediate loading prosthesis, which is relevant for the comfort, confidence and aesthetics of the patient. The objective of this article is to present the surgical protocol for placing zygomatic implants and a robust review of the current literature on the clinical evolution of these implants and their different techniques. And no less important, to show the advantages, purpose and benefits of using curved and more anatomical transepithelial abutments with a multiunit platform when we need to place an immediate load and definitive full arch prosthesis.
},
 year = {2025}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Zygomatic Implants Literature Review and a Clinical Case Involving Bone Grafting and the Importance of the Use of Multiunit ELEMENT® Transepithelial Abutments
AU  - Iñaki Mayo Fajo
AU  - Antonio Macías Lloret
Y1  - 2025/10/31
PY  - 2025
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12
T2  - International Journal of Dental Medicine
JF  - International Journal of Dental Medicine
JO  - International Journal of Dental Medicine
SP  - 49
EP  - 57
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2472-1387
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12
AB  - Zygomatic implants, originally designed by Dr. Branemark in 1989, are implants which could have 45 to 55 -degree heads of angulation, 4.2 or 4.5 millimeters in diameter at their widest point and measuring between 30 and even 50 or 60 millimeters in length. They are inserted from the palatal aspect of the alveolar process, following the zygomatic-alveolar crest until they are anchored in the body of the malar bone. In maxillomandibular patients, they enter directly into the body of the malar bone. These implants offer the surgeon an alternative when planning implant-supported prosthetic and rehabilitation treatment, especially in patients with severely atrophied upper jaws, where bone grafting is impossible or has previously failed. And also, a reliable and predictable option for immediate loading prosthesis, which is relevant for the comfort, confidence and aesthetics of the patient. The objective of this article is to present the surgical protocol for placing zygomatic implants and a robust review of the current literature on the clinical evolution of these implants and their different techniques. And no less important, to show the advantages, purpose and benefits of using curved and more anatomical transepithelial abutments with a multiunit platform when we need to place an immediate load and definitive full arch prosthesis.

VL  - 11
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Iñaki Mayo Fajo

Oral Surgery and Implants Department, Dentistry School, University of Seville, Seville, Spain; Oral Prosthetics and TMJ Department, Dentistry School, UIC Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0009-0000-7158-5243
Antonio Macías Lloret

Oral Implantology and Oral Rehabilitation Department, Dentistry School, UIC Mexico City, Mexico City, Mexico

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0009-0003-0567-9884

Download PDF

Submit an Article

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Fajo, I. M., Lloret, A. M. (2025). Zygomatic Implants Literature Review and a Clinical Case Involving Bone Grafting and the Importance of the Use of Multiunit ELEMENT® Transepithelial Abutments. International Journal of Dental Medicine, 11(2), 49-57. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Fajo, I. M.; Lloret, A. M. Zygomatic Implants Literature Review and a Clinical Case Involving Bone Grafting and the Importance of the Use of Multiunit ELEMENT® Transepithelial Abutments. Int. J. Dent. Med. 2025, 11(2), 49-57. doi: 10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Fajo IM, Lloret AM. Zygomatic Implants Literature Review and a Clinical Case Involving Bone Grafting and the Importance of the Use of Multiunit ELEMENT® Transepithelial Abutments. Int J Dent Med. 2025;11(2):49-57. doi: 10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12,
  author = {Iñaki Mayo Fajo and Antonio Macías Lloret},
  title = {Zygomatic Implants Literature Review and a Clinical Case Involving Bone Grafting and the Importance of the Use of Multiunit ELEMENT® Transepithelial Abutments},
  journal = {International Journal of Dental Medicine},
  volume = {11},
  number = {2},
  pages = {49-57},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijdm.20251102.12},
  abstract = {Zygomatic implants, originally designed by Dr. Branemark in 1989, are implants which could have 45 to 55 -degree heads of angulation, 4.2 or 4.5 millimeters in diameter at their widest point and measuring between 30 and even 50 or 60 millimeters in length. They are inserted from the palatal aspect of the alveolar process, following the zygomatic-alveolar crest until they are anchored in the body of the malar bone. In maxillomandibular patients, they enter directly into the body of the malar bone. These implants offer the surgeon an alternative when planning implant-supported prosthetic and rehabilitation treatment, especially in patients with severely atrophied upper jaws, where bone grafting is impossible or has previously failed. And also, a reliable and predictable option for immediate loading prosthesis, which is relevant for the comfort, confidence and aesthetics of the patient. The objective of this article is to present the surgical protocol for placing zygomatic implants and a robust review of the current literature on the clinical evolution of these implants and their different techniques. And no less important, to show the advantages, purpose and benefits of using curved and more anatomical transepithelial abutments with a multiunit platform when we need to place an immediate load and definitive full arch prosthesis.
},
 year = {2025}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Zygomatic Implants Literature Review and a Clinical Case Involving Bone Grafting and the Importance of the Use of Multiunit ELEMENT® Transepithelial Abutments
AU  - Iñaki Mayo Fajo
AU  - Antonio Macías Lloret
Y1  - 2025/10/31
PY  - 2025
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12
T2  - International Journal of Dental Medicine
JF  - International Journal of Dental Medicine
JO  - International Journal of Dental Medicine
SP  - 49
EP  - 57
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2472-1387
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijdm.20251102.12
AB  - Zygomatic implants, originally designed by Dr. Branemark in 1989, are implants which could have 45 to 55 -degree heads of angulation, 4.2 or 4.5 millimeters in diameter at their widest point and measuring between 30 and even 50 or 60 millimeters in length. They are inserted from the palatal aspect of the alveolar process, following the zygomatic-alveolar crest until they are anchored in the body of the malar bone. In maxillomandibular patients, they enter directly into the body of the malar bone. These implants offer the surgeon an alternative when planning implant-supported prosthetic and rehabilitation treatment, especially in patients with severely atrophied upper jaws, where bone grafting is impossible or has previously failed. And also, a reliable and predictable option for immediate loading prosthesis, which is relevant for the comfort, confidence and aesthetics of the patient. The objective of this article is to present the surgical protocol for placing zygomatic implants and a robust review of the current literature on the clinical evolution of these implants and their different techniques. And no less important, to show the advantages, purpose and benefits of using curved and more anatomical transepithelial abutments with a multiunit platform when we need to place an immediate load and definitive full arch prosthesis.

VL  - 11
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download