Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 32Dental Implant Techniques and OutcomesDental materials and restorationsBone Tissue Engineering Materials

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Custom-made additively manufactured subperiosteal implant

Open access
STRAPPA, Enrico M., MEMÈ, Lucia, CEREA, Mauro, ROY, Marco, BAMBINI, Fabrizio·2023·Minerva Dental and Oral Science
DOI 10.23736/s2724-6329.22.04640-x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Subperiosteal implants were introduced in the last century. Poor clinical results led those implants to be progressively abandoned. Recently, several Authors suggested a revival of subperiosteal implants as an alternative to regenerative procedures. The purpose of this study was to describe the clinical application of custom-made additively manufactured subperiosteal implant for fixed prosthetic rehabilitation of edentulous maxilla. Plaster models of the upper and the lower arch were scanned, as well as the mock-up. Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine data obtained from cone beam computed tomography were processed through the thresholding procedure. The design of the subperiosteal implant was drawn on the stereolithographic model and scanned. Once the digital project of the subperiosteal implant was completed, it was sent to additive manufacturing. After the surgery, the patient was strictly monitored for up to 2 years. The outcomes were assessed based on the incurrence of biological and mechanical complications, postoperative complications, and implant survival. The patient did not suffer from postoperative complications. Neither biological nor mechanical complications occurred during the follow-up period. At the end of the study, the implant was still in function. Custom-made subperiosteal implants could be considered as an alternative to regenerative procedures for the rehabilitation of severe bone atrophy. Further studies are needed in the future to confirm the positive outcome.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.23736/s2724-6329.22.04640-x

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 . Figure 1.-cone Beam computed tomography (cBct) evaluation for treatment planning. the different projections (a-D) show the severe bone atrophy of the upper jaw. the 3D reconstruction of the bone anatomy of the upper jaw (e, F).
Figure 1 . Figure 1.-cone Beam computed tomography (cBct) evaluation for treatment planning. the different projections (a-D) show the severe bone atrophy of the upper jaw. the 3D reconstruction of the bone anatomy of the upper jaw (e, F).CC-BY-NC · From the PDF
Figure 2 . Figure 2.-Digital planning of the subperiosteal implant in different projection (a-D).
Figure 2 . Figure 2.-Digital planning of the subperiosteal implant in different projection (a-D).CC-BY-NC · From the PDF
Figure 3 . Figure 3.-clinical evaluations during the follow-up: healing at 6 months (a, B) and at 2 years (c, D) after the surgery.
Figure 3 . Figure 3.-clinical evaluations during the follow-up: healing at 6 months (a, B) and at 2 years (c, D) after the surgery.CC-BY-NC · From the PDF
Figure 4 . Figure 4.-radiographic evaluations (orthopantomography) during the follow-up: 1 months (a), 6 months (B), and 2 years (c) after the surgery.
Figure 4 . Figure 4.-radiographic evaluations (orthopantomography) during the follow-up: 1 months (a), 6 months (B), and 2 years (c) after the surgery.CC-BY-NC · From the PDF
Figure 5 . Figure 5.-Definitive prothesis. A) The metal connection structure; B) the definitive Toronto Bridge.
Figure 5 . Figure 5.-Definitive prothesis. A) The metal connection structure; B) the definitive Toronto Bridge.CC-BY-NC · From the PDF
Figure 6 . Figure 6.-cone Beam computed tomography (cBct) evaluation at 2 years after the surgery. the different projection (a-F) showed the good interaction between the implant and the underlying bone.
Figure 6 . Figure 6.-cone Beam computed tomography (cBct) evaluation at 2 years after the surgery. the different projection (a-F) showed the good interaction between the implant and the underlying bone.CC-BY-NC · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 40 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Goldberg NI, 1949, The implant lower denture, Dent Dig, 55, 490
  2. Linkow LI, Cherchève R. Theories and Techniques of Oral Implantology. Saint Louis, MO: C. V. Mosby Company; 1970.
  3. Cranin AN, 1975, Some musings on implants, Alpha Omegan, 11

Cited by

See all 32

Metadata

Authors
STRAPPA, E. M., MEMÈ, L., CEREA, M., ROY, M., & BAMBINI, F.
Affiliations
  • Marche Polytechnic University (IT)
  • Poznan University of Medical Sciences (PL)
Corresponding author
STRAPPA, Enrico M.
ORCID
Venue
Minerva Dental and Oral Science
Publisher
Edizioni Minerva Medica
Published
2023-02
Volume
71
Issue
6
Pages
353-360
ISSN
  • 0026-4970 (ISSN-L)
  • 2724-6329
  • 2724-6337
DOI
10.23736/s2724-6329.22.04640-x
OpenAlex
W4308551558
Cited by
32
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 1
FWCI
6.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Minerva Dental and Oral Science (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Università Politecnica delle Marche (Università Politecnica delle Marche) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Oral Surgery › Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › General Dentistry › Dental materials and restorations
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Bone Tissue Engineering Materials
Keywords
subperiosteal implants, patient-specific implants, additive manufacturing, 3D printing, edentulous maxilla, implant survival, postoperative complications, cone-beam computed tomography, stereolithography
MeSH terms
Atrophy, Dental Implantation, Endosseous, Humans, Maxilla, Mouth, Edentulous, Dental Implants

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Custom-made additively manufactured subperiosteal implant. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.23736/s2724-6329.22.04640-x
The paper
STRAPPA, E. M., MEMÈ, L., CEREA, M., ROY, M., & BAMBINI, F. (2023). Custom-made additively manufactured subperiosteal implant. Minerva Dental and Oral Science. https://doi.org/10.23736/s2724-6329.22.04640-x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.