Purpose: The aim of this study was to systematically review and compare the survival rates (SRs) of oral rehabilitations performed with 2 zygomatic implants (ZIs) combined with regular implants (RIs) versus 4 ZI.
Material and methods: An electronic search was performed in several databases for articles published in English between 2007 and 2015. Articles reporting human studies were included in this systematic review.
Results: The search yielded to a total of 417 studies, of which 6 were included in this study. ZIs SR weighted mean was 98.0% with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 96.7% to 99.8%. For the control group (2 ZIs + 2 RIs) and the test group (4 ZIs), the implant SR was 98.6% and 97.4%, respectively, with a 95% CI. No statistically significant differences in terms of SRs were obtained between both groups P = 0.286.
Conclusions: The data analysis showed favorable results for treatment with 4 ZIs. The results showed no statistical differences in using 1 or another treatment, in terms of survival and failure rates. The reduction on treatment time and morbidity related to regenerative approaches may be its main advantage. In conclusion, the zygoma quad seems to be the treatment of choice for the rehabilitation of the severely atrophic maxilla.