Cargando…
The Zygomatic Anatomy-Guided Approach, Zygomatic Orbital Floor Classification, and ORIS Criteria—A 10-Year Follow-Up
Background: Presently, the management of patients with maxilla bone defects of the Cawood V or VI class is achieved using zygomatic or individual implants or through augmentation of the bone. For zygomatic implants, the ORIS criteria represent the most common factor in helping practitioners register...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10607356/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37892822 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12206681 |
_version_ | 1785127527014989824 |
---|---|
author | Zielinski, Rafal Okulski, Jakub Simka, Wojciech Kozakiewicz, Marcin |
author_facet | Zielinski, Rafal Okulski, Jakub Simka, Wojciech Kozakiewicz, Marcin |
author_sort | Zielinski, Rafal |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Presently, the management of patients with maxilla bone defects of the Cawood V or VI class is achieved using zygomatic or individual implants or through augmentation of the bone. For zygomatic implants, the ORIS criteria represent the most common factor in helping practitioners register success rates. The zygomatic anatomy-guided approach (ZAGA)and zygomatic orbital floor (ZOF) are factors that are crucial to examining the anatomy of a particular patient before the procedure. The aim of thisarticle is to find the statistical relationship between the abovementioned terms and other factors. Methods: A total of 81 patients underwent zygomatic implant procedures in different configurations. The ORIS, ZAGA, and ZOF parameters were compared with other factors such as type of surgery, sex, age, and the anatomy of the zygomatic bone. Results: Most patients in this article were classified as ZAGA Class 2. The relationships between type of surgery and ZAGA classification, and ZAGA and sinus/maxilla zygomatic implant localization were statistically significant. Conclusions: The ZAGA and ZOF scales are practical and valuable factors that should be taken into account before surgery, whereas to date, criteria better than the ORIS scale have not been described in terms of the success of zygomatic implants. The ZOF scale might omit perforation of the orbit because this parameter warns a practitioner to be aware of the anatomy of the orbit. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10607356 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106073562023-10-28 The Zygomatic Anatomy-Guided Approach, Zygomatic Orbital Floor Classification, and ORIS Criteria—A 10-Year Follow-Up Zielinski, Rafal Okulski, Jakub Simka, Wojciech Kozakiewicz, Marcin J Clin Med Article Background: Presently, the management of patients with maxilla bone defects of the Cawood V or VI class is achieved using zygomatic or individual implants or through augmentation of the bone. For zygomatic implants, the ORIS criteria represent the most common factor in helping practitioners register success rates. The zygomatic anatomy-guided approach (ZAGA)and zygomatic orbital floor (ZOF) are factors that are crucial to examining the anatomy of a particular patient before the procedure. The aim of thisarticle is to find the statistical relationship between the abovementioned terms and other factors. Methods: A total of 81 patients underwent zygomatic implant procedures in different configurations. The ORIS, ZAGA, and ZOF parameters were compared with other factors such as type of surgery, sex, age, and the anatomy of the zygomatic bone. Results: Most patients in this article were classified as ZAGA Class 2. The relationships between type of surgery and ZAGA classification, and ZAGA and sinus/maxilla zygomatic implant localization were statistically significant. Conclusions: The ZAGA and ZOF scales are practical and valuable factors that should be taken into account before surgery, whereas to date, criteria better than the ORIS scale have not been described in terms of the success of zygomatic implants. The ZOF scale might omit perforation of the orbit because this parameter warns a practitioner to be aware of the anatomy of the orbit. MDPI 2023-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10607356/ /pubmed/37892822 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12206681 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Zielinski, Rafal Okulski, Jakub Simka, Wojciech Kozakiewicz, Marcin The Zygomatic Anatomy-Guided Approach, Zygomatic Orbital Floor Classification, and ORIS Criteria—A 10-Year Follow-Up |
title | The Zygomatic Anatomy-Guided Approach, Zygomatic Orbital Floor Classification, and ORIS Criteria—A 10-Year Follow-Up |
title_full | The Zygomatic Anatomy-Guided Approach, Zygomatic Orbital Floor Classification, and ORIS Criteria—A 10-Year Follow-Up |
title_fullStr | The Zygomatic Anatomy-Guided Approach, Zygomatic Orbital Floor Classification, and ORIS Criteria—A 10-Year Follow-Up |
title_full_unstemmed | The Zygomatic Anatomy-Guided Approach, Zygomatic Orbital Floor Classification, and ORIS Criteria—A 10-Year Follow-Up |
title_short | The Zygomatic Anatomy-Guided Approach, Zygomatic Orbital Floor Classification, and ORIS Criteria—A 10-Year Follow-Up |
title_sort | zygomatic anatomy-guided approach, zygomatic orbital floor classification, and oris criteria—a 10-year follow-up |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10607356/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37892822 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12206681 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zielinskirafal thezygomaticanatomyguidedapproachzygomaticorbitalfloorclassificationandoriscriteriaa10yearfollowup AT okulskijakub thezygomaticanatomyguidedapproachzygomaticorbitalfloorclassificationandoriscriteriaa10yearfollowup AT simkawojciech thezygomaticanatomyguidedapproachzygomaticorbitalfloorclassificationandoriscriteriaa10yearfollowup AT kozakiewiczmarcin thezygomaticanatomyguidedapproachzygomaticorbitalfloorclassificationandoriscriteriaa10yearfollowup AT zielinskirafal zygomaticanatomyguidedapproachzygomaticorbitalfloorclassificationandoriscriteriaa10yearfollowup AT okulskijakub zygomaticanatomyguidedapproachzygomaticorbitalfloorclassificationandoriscriteriaa10yearfollowup AT simkawojciech zygomaticanatomyguidedapproachzygomaticorbitalfloorclassificationandoriscriteriaa10yearfollowup AT kozakiewiczmarcin zygomaticanatomyguidedapproachzygomaticorbitalfloorclassificationandoriscriteriaa10yearfollowup |