In oral biology, tissue engineering aims at regenerating functional tissues through a series of key events that occur during alveolar/periodontal tissue formation and growth, by means of scaffolds that deliver signaling molecules and cells. Due to their excellent physicochemical properties and biomimetic features, nanomaterials are attractive alternatives offering many advantages for stimulating cell growth and promoting tissue regeneration through tissue engineering. The main aim of this article was to review the currently available literature to provide an overview of the different nano-scale scaffolds as key factors of tissue engineering for alveolar bone regeneration procedures. In this narrative review, PubMed, Medline, Scopus and Cochrane electronic databases were searched using key words like “tissue engineering”, “regenerative medicine”, “alveolar bone defects”, “alveolar bone regeneration”, “nanomaterials”, “scaffolds”, “nanospheres” and “nanofibrous scaffolds”. No limitation regarding language, publication date and study design was set. Hand-searching of the reference list of identified articles was also undertaken. The aim of this article was to give a brief introduction to review the role of different nanoscaffolds for bone regeneration and the main focus was set to underline their role for alveolar bone regeneration procedures.

No abstract

Background: Zygomatic implant surgery is considered as a safe and successful alternative to the conventional implant surgery with bone grafts for patients with severe atrophic maxilla. Purpose: The aim of this retrospective clinical case series was to report clinical outcome of zygomatic implants with a follow-up between 6 months and 7 years. Materials and methods: A total of 110 patients with 302 zygomatic implants were included in this study. The intra and postoperative complications and survival rate of zygomatic implants were evaluated. Results: The study included 110 consecutively treated patients with an age range of 21 to 76 years (mean 57.35 years, SD 10.42). The overall zygomatic implant survival rate was 98.34%. There were five implant failures in four patients. One intraoperative and 17 postoperative complications developed in 18 patients. There were no dropouts and the median follow-up of the patients was 41.75 months (with a range of 6-89 months). Conclusions: According to the results, in cases of severely atrophic posterior maxilla, zygomatic implant surgery can be considered as an effective and safe alternative to conventional implants and bone grafting procedures.

The aim of this human cadaver study was to assess the accuracy of zygomatic/pterygoid implant placement using custom-made bone-supported laser sintered titanium templates. For this purpose, pre-surgical planning was done on computed tomography scans of each cadaver. Surgical guides were printed using direct metal laser sintering technology. Four zygomatic and two pterygoid implants were inserted in each case using the guided protocol and related tools. Post-operative computed tomography (CT) scans were obtained to evaluate deviations between the planned and inserted implants. Accuracy was measured by overlaying the real position in the post-operative CT on the virtual presurgical placement of the implant in a CT image. Descriptive and bivariate analyses of the data were performed. As a result, a total of 40 zygomatic and 20 pterygoid implants were inserted in 10 cadavers. The mean deviations between the planned and the placed zygomatic and pterygoid implants were respectively (mean ± SD): 1.69° ± 1.12° and 4.15° ± 3.53° for angular deviation. Linear distance deviations: 0.93 mm ± 1.23 mm and 1.35 mm ± 1.45 mm at platform depth, 1.35 mm ± 0.78 mm and 1.81 mm ± 1.47 mm at apical plane, 1.07 mm ± 1.47 mm and 1.22 mm ± 1.44 mm for apical depth. In conclusion, the surgical guide system showed accuracy for all the variables studied and allowed acceptable and accurate implant placement regardless of the case complexity.

The surgical procedures and the zygomatic implant design reduce remarkably the serious post-operative sequelae due to the intrasinus path of the zygomatic fixtures.