Peri‐zygomatic complications on zygomatic implants with or without penetrating the external surface of zygoma: A 2‐year retrospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The main purpose of this retrospective study was to assess the difference in the incidence of peri-zygomatic complications (PZCs) when zygomatic implants (ZIs) penetrate or do not penetrate the external surface of zygoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 32 patients with edentulous maxillae or potentially edentulous maxillae undergo zygomatic implantation. The patients were divided into the penetration group (P-group) and the non-penetration group (N-group) according to whether the apex of implants penetrated the external surface of zygoma in postoperative CBCT. The extension length, the penetration section of the implants, and the skin thickness at the corresponding position were simultaneously measured. Clinical follow-up was conducted regularly until 2 years after surgery. The occurrence of PZCs (including peri-zygomatic infection, skin numbness, non-infectious pain, and foreign body sensation) was recorded. A mixed effect logistic model was used to compare the difference of complication rate between the P-group and the N-group, and odds ratio (OR) was calculated. Then identify the impact of the extension length, penetration section and skin thickness in P-group with the same model. RESULTS: A total of 71 ZIs were implanted in 32 patients, including 37 implants in the P-group and 34 implants in the N-group. During the 2-year follow-up, a total of 13 implants occurred PZCs, with an overall complication rate of 18.3%. Thereinto, the incidence rate was 29.7% in the P-group, and 5.9% in the N-group (OR = 6.77). In P-group, there was a significant difference in complication rate of different extension lengths, while the penetration section and skin thickness had no statistical significance on the complication rate. CONCLUSION: Under the limitation of this study, to minimize the risk of PZCs, ZI should be placed in a manner that avoids the apex penetrating the external surface of the zygoma.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".