Copyright © 2026 Authors retain the copyright of this article. This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

@article{192890,
        author = {Dr. Sakshi Panday},
        title = {UTILIZATION OF TRANSNASAL IMPLANTS – A SCOPING REVIEW},
        journal = {International Journal of Innovative Research in Technology},
        year = {2026},
        volume = {12},
        number = {9},
        pages = {3372-3378},
        issn = {2349-6002},
        url = {https://ijirt.org/article?manuscript=192890},
        abstract = {Objective: This scoping review aims to assess the scope and nature of evidence concerning transnasal implants.
Introduction: Transnasal implants are dental implants placed through the nasal cavity to anchor into the upper jaw bone, often used for patients with significant bone loss, particularly in the anterior maxillary region. They restore both aesthetics and function of teeth and serve as an alternative to traditional implants when bone density is insufficient. These implants can support various dental restorations, including full-arch prostheses, and offer an alternative to quad zygomatic implants in certain cases.
Methods: An extensive literature search was conducted across three databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, and Scopus) from January 2020 to March 2024. English-language articles were included, emphasizing keywords related to oral surgery, transnasal implants, and quad zygoma.
Results: Extended transnasal implants can be an appropriate therapeutic alternative for individuals with atrophic maxillae, contingent upon adequate bone volume in the frontal process of maxilla for stabilizing apical implant placement. The canine or frontomaxillary pillar offers dense bone and protects the nasal fossa. While the technique involves grafting, it offers graftless benefits like reduced morbidity, simpler surgery, and shorter operating time, enabling immediate function. However, its applicability is limited by anatomical factors.
Conclusions: To enhance implant distribution and load management during function, transnasal implants should be considered in treatment plans for severely resorbed maxillary arches. When part of the therapeutic approach, they may be utilized in conjunction with zygomatic or posterior implants.},
        keywords = {Transnasal implants, atrophic maxilla, quad zygoma, rehabilitation},
        month = {February},
        }