Zygomatic implants

So what exactly is a zygomatic implant?

A zygomatic implant is a slightly unusual kind of dental implant, designed for patients whose upper jaw is seriously short of bone. Where a standard dental implant measures 1 to 1.5 cm and screws into the alveolar bone, a zygomatic implant is much longer, 3 to 5.5 cm, and finds its anchorage in the zygomatic bone, in other words the cheekbone.

It’s often called the “graft-free technique”, and that’s exactly the appeal. Developed by Professor Per-Ingvar Brånemark with Nobel Biocare in Sweden, it avoids the long bone-graft procedures that add months to treatment. For many patients, this is what finally makes fixed teeth possible.

Why reach for the cheekbone?

When you lose your teeth, the jawbone is no longer used and slowly melts away: this is bone resorption. Past a certain point, there simply isn’t enough bone left to take a standard implant. The cheekbone has one real advantage: it keeps its density and volume throughout life, without resorbing. Enough to hold one or two implants on each side, in a single procedure.

Zygomatic implants are made of medical titanium, a biocompatible material that fuses naturally with bone over the weeks that follow, a process called osseointegration. Their angle is calculated to reach the cheekbone while carefully skirting the sinuses.

Who are zygomatic implants for?

This solution is aimed above all at patients with severe maxillary atrophy, meaning marked bone loss in the upper jaw. It comes into play with complete or partial loss of the upper teeth alongside insufficient bone, when a dental bone graft is ruled out or has already failed, or for people tired of a removable denture who finally want something fixed.

Thinking about a full-mouth restoration? Take a look too at our dental implants in Turkey options, for care from start to finish with English-speaking support.

Benefits, results and recovery: what you need to know

Set against the usual ways of rebuilding a smile, zygomatic implants have some solid arguments. The first is that there’s no bone graft. In a very atrophied patient, a graft normally means 6 to 12 months of healing before a single implant can even go in. Here, that step disappears completely.

Next comes immediate loading. Fixed temporary teeth by the next day changes a life in a matter of hours, not months. And the stability lasts: recent meta-analyses report a survival rate of 96.2% over an average six-year follow-up, on a par with standard dental implants.

What results can you expect?

Both functionally and cosmetically, the feedback is very encouraging. You chew normally again, you speak without the nuisance of a denture that shifts, and day-to-day comfort comes close to that of real teeth. As for your smile, the look is balanced. Most patients talk above all about a genuine gain in quality of life, something often underestimated before the procedure.

Recovery after surgery

It’s generally well tolerated. Any pain tends to stay moderate and settles with ordinary painkillers. Swelling (oedema) of the cheeks appears in the first few days and goes down within 7 to 10 days. Bruising can show on the cheekbones and under the eyes, then fades. We advise soft food for the first 2 months, while the implants integrate. Sport waits 2 weeks, and smoking is genuinely best avoided, as it slows healing.

The risks, no sugar-coating

Like any surgery, fitting these implants carries risks. The most common complication is sinusitis, around 14.2% over five years in a 2023 meta-analysis. Soft-tissue infections, passing numbness (paraesthesia) and a communication between mouth and sinus (an oro-antral fistula) are less common. Treated promptly they usually settle, though sinusitis can occasionally put an implant at risk.

And if zygomatic implants weren’t the answer?

Other options exist depending on your situation. A dental bone graft is still worthwhile when it’s feasible, even if it lengthens the journey. The All-on-4 and All-on-6 techniques suit cases where enough bone remains for tilted implants. And with moderate bone loss, a sinus lift may be enough to make standard implants possible again. It’s your surgeon who decides, based on your anatomy, at the consultation.

Zygomatic implants: the full picture on this dental restoration

Zygomatic implants rank among the major advances in modern implant dentistry. Born more than thirty years ago, the technique answers one very specific problem: giving fixed teeth back to patients whose upper jaw is too atrophied to hold standard implants, exactly where the usual solutions run out of road.

Understanding maxillary atrophy and what it leads to

Severe maxillary atrophy is the gradual wasting of the upper jawbone after tooth loss. The mechanism is natural: with no stimulation from the tooth roots, the alveolar bone slowly loses density and volume. The pace varies from person to person, and a large share of the ridge can disappear in the first years after extractions.

The consequences go beyond looks. Beyond a sagging face, missing teeth make chewing harder, blur speech, complicate digestion when food isn’t chewed properly, and often weigh on social life, a point too easily brushed aside. A removable denture only solves part of the problem: its stability leaves something to be desired, especially on the upper jaw.

From osseointegration to zygomatic implants

Professor Per-Ingvar Brånemark, a pioneer of implant dentistry and “father of osseointegration”, developed zygomatic implants in the early 1990s. The idea: to offer an alternative to heavy bone grafts in patients with extreme maxillary resorption. The technique was then documented clinically, and refined over the decades that followed.

The principle rests on the zygomatic bone (or malar bone) as the anchor point. Sitting below the eye socket, at the level of the cheek, this bone has one precious quirk: it keeps its density and volume for life, even after severe resorption of the upper jaw. The implants, 30 to 55 mm long, are inserted at a precise angle that crosses or runs alongside the sinus to reach the zygoma.

Modern surgical approaches

Several techniques sit side by side, refined over the years. The intra-sinus approach (IZI), first described by Brånemark, sends the implant through the sinus. The extra-sinus approach (EZI), more recent, runs it along the outer sinus wall. The ZAGA classification (Zygoma Anatomy-Guided Approach), proposed by Dr Aparicio, gives a framework for tailoring the surgery to each patient’s anatomy.

Recent data suggests the extra-sinus approach comes with slightly less sinusitis after surgery. But really, the choice comes down to your anatomy, assessed on a CBCT scan before the procedure. Surgeons usually place 2 to 4 zygomatic implants per arch, sometimes combined with standard implants at the front when the remaining bone allows.

What the clinical studies say

The literature here is now plentiful and fairly reassuring. The meta-analysis by Brennand Roper and colleagues (2023), published in the International Journal of Implant Dentistry, reports a survival rate of 96.2% (confidence interval 93.8% to 97.7%) at six years, across follow-ups running from 3 to nearly 12 years. That’s on a par with standard dental implants over comparable periods.

An earlier systematic review, led by Chrcanovic and colleagues (2016), pooled 68 studies, that is 4556 implants placed in 2161 patients, for a cumulative survival rate of 95.21% at 12 years. One telling detail: most failures happen in the first 6 months, with stability becoming excellent after that. And immediate loading, with the prosthesis fitted the very next day, shows results at least as good as delayed loading, which backs up current practice.

Zygomatic implants or a bone graft?

The choice depends on many clinical factors. Standard bone grafts, whether taken from you (autogenous), from a donor or from a biomaterial, call for 6 to 12 months of healing before the implants go in. That delay stretches out the journey and often means a second surgical site for harvesting.

Zygomatic implants remove this in-between step. Everything happens in a single surgical phase, with fixed temporary teeth in 24 to 48 hours. For an overview of every restoration option, our full guide to dental implants covers the ground.

Turkey, a reference point in advanced implant dentistry

Istanbul has become a global hub for implant dentistry, drawing hundreds of thousands of international patients each year for their dental care. Body Expert’s partner clinics are equipped from top to bottom (CBCT scanner, 3D planning, premium materials) and their maxillofacial surgeons are known for their command of zygomatic implants.

The financial side counts too: up to 70% savings compared with the UK, with Neodent zygomatic implants placed in these partner clinics. A transparent, itemised breakdown is set out in the pricing table on this page. Want a clear picture of your own case? Take a look at our dedicated page on dental care in Turkey.

In summary

Zygomatic implants offer a way out for patients sometimes judged “inoperable” elsewhere, for want of enough bone in the upper jaw. By resting on the cheekbone, solid and stable for life, they bring back fixed teeth with no bone graft, often in 24 to 48 hours. That’s the whole promise of this full dental restoration, even with severe maxillary atrophy.

On results, the studies are reassuring: around 96% survival at six years, stability comparable to standard implants, and complications that are usually manageable when the work is entrusted to an experienced maxillofacial surgeon. The technique stays demanding, which is why a precise 3D scan assessment matters, along with a team that places this kind of implant day in, day out.

At Body Expert, your project starts with a remote consultation and a free assessment of your suitability, with English-speaking support from the first conversation through to follow-up once you’re home. Our partner clinics in Istanbul, selected for their facilities and their surgeons’ experience, give you up to 70% savings on UK prices, with the detail set out in the pricing table on this page. A question about your case, how the trip works or the possible alternatives? Our experts will put together a free, personalised quote within 24h, with no obligation. It’s often the simplest way to find out, at last, whether fixed teeth are within your reach.

Sources and references

1. Brennand Roper, M., Vissink, A., Dudding, T., et al. (2023). Long-term treatment outcomes with zygomatic implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Implant Dentistry, 9(1), 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-023-00479-x
2. Chrcanovic, B. R., Albrektsson, T., & Wennerberg, A. (2016). Survival and complications of zygomatic implants: an updated systematic review. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 74(10), 1949-1964. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27422530/
3. Solà Pérez, A., Pastorino, D., Aparicio, C., et al. (2022). Success rates of zygomatic implants for the rehabilitation of severely atrophic maxilla: a systematic review. Dentistry Journal, 10(8), 151. https://doi.org/10.3390/dj10080151
4. Al-Nawas, B., et al. (2023). ITI consensus report on zygomatic implants: indications, evaluation of surgical techniques and long-term treatment outcomes. International Journal of Implant Dentistry, 9(1), 28. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37698775/
5. Moraschini, V., de Queiroz, T. R., Sartoretto, S. C., et al. (2023). Survival and complications of zygomatic implants compared to conventional implants reported in longitudinal studies with a follow-up period of at least 5 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 25(1), 177-189. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36373779/