Abstract
AIM: To systematically review existing scientific literature to determine, compare and evaluate the sinus complication and survival rates of quad zygoma against two zygomatic implants with combination of two regular implants in atrophic maxilla in adults. METHODS: Review was performed in accordance with preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines and registered in PROSPERO-CRD42023392721 Electronic databases like PubMed, Google scholar and EBSCO host were searched from 2000 to December 2022 for studies reporting treatment of Atrophic maxilla with either quad zygoma or two zygomatic implants in combination with two regular implants. Quality assessment was evaluated using Cochrane risk of bias-2 tool for randomized controlled trials (RCT). The risk of bias summary graph and risk of bias summary applicability concern was plotted using RevMan software version 5.3. The odds ratio (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used as summary statistic measure with random effect model and p value < 0.05 as statistically significant. RESULTS: Eleven studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in qualitative synthesis, of which only nine studies were suitable for meta-analysis. The pooled estimate through the odds ratio 0.59 signifies that the quad zygomatic implants on an average has 0.59 (0.18-1.93) times or odds of developing sinus complications while the SMD signifies that better survival rate (SR) on an average is 0.35 (- 0.61 to 1.30) times more by two zygomatic implants with combination of two regular implants as compared to quad zygomatic implants (p > 0.05). Publication bias through the funnel plot showed asymmetric distribution with systematic heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Two zygomatic implants in combination with two regular implants provides better survival rate and less sinus complications compared to quad zygoma in atrophic maxilla. Despite the high SR observed, there is a need to conduct more randomized controlled clinical trials to examine their efficacy in comparison with other techniques.