Effectiveness of zygomatic-implant fixed rehabilitation for the atrophic edentulous maxilla: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Atrophic edentulous maxilla is a debilitating condition caused by the progressive and irreversible bone resorption following loss of teeth, that results in bone of inadequate volume and density. This makes conventional implant therapy extremely challenging without complex reconstructive procedures. Several techniques such as sinus augmentation, short implants, and tilted implants have been used for the rehabilitation of the atrophic maxilla. In recent years, zygomatic implants have emerged as a graftless rehabilitation technique. However, few studies compare zygomatic-implant fixed rehabilitation with other fixed rehabilitation techniques. The existing body of evidence on zygomatic implants is largely based on clinical and disease-oriented outcomes. Methods A network meta-analysis (NMA) will be conducted in order to compare the effectiveness of zygomatic-implant fixed rehabilitation with the other rehabilitation techniques. Experimental and observational studies comparing different implant-assisted fixed rehabilitation in adults with atrophic maxilla will be included. The primary and secondary outcomes will be patient’s satisfaction and quality of life respectively. Additional outcomes include the implant’s survival/success, and biological and prosthetic complications. An electronic search will be performed through various databases for articles in English and French, without time limits. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool for randomized controlled trials, and ROBINS-I for non-randomized and observational studies. Two independent reviewers will screen the titles and abstracts and extract data. Any discrepancy between reviewers will be discussed and resolved through consensus or with the help of a third reviewer. Pairwise meta-analyses will be performed using a random effects model.I2,τ2, transitivity, subgroup/meta-regression analyses will assess and explain heterogeneity and distribution of effect modifiers. A network plot will be created to connect the different interventions directly and indirectly. Interventions will be ranked using the surface under cumulative ranking curve. Confidence in the results of the NMA will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Discussion This study will be the first to assess the effectiveness of zygomatic-implant fixed rehabilitation for the atrophic maxilla using NMA. The evidence obtained will aid clinical decision-making and will advance the knowledge of the rehabilitation techniques for the atrophic maxilla. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42023353303.
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 | 0.041 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.024 | 0.027 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.003 |
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".