Home/Subperiosteal implants
Implant placement in severe atrophy

Patient-specific subperiosteal implants

The framework rests on the bone rather than entering it. Ti-6Al-4V titanium, SLM printing, fixation with mini-screws in zones of dense bone.

Ti-6Al-4V subperiosteal implant in hand
Patient-specific Ti-6Al-4V subperiosteal framework with abutments — SLM printing
How it works

A construct that rests on the bone

The framework is manufactured from the DICOM data and placed under the periosteum, over the alveolar processes.

  • Anatomical adaptation — a passive fit with no gaps
  • Mini-screws in zones of dense bone: paranasally and at the zygomatico-alveolar crest
  • A temporary prosthesis can be fitted on the day of surgery
Subperiosteal framework with abutments
The framework rests on the bone; the abutments emerge to support the prosthetic superstructure
Subperiosteal framework with the prosthetic superstructure on the model
Outcome for the patient

Support for a fixed prosthesis — in severe atrophy

The protruding abutments of the framework carry the prosthetic superstructure; the load is distributed across zones of dense bone identified on the CT.

Visual demonstration

Framework on the anatomy

Subperiosteal framework on a maxillary model
Maxilla / Support: the paranasal region and the zygomatico-alveolar crest
Subperiosteal framework on a mandibular model
Four segments / Framework matched to the individual anatomy of the alveolar processes
Framework with the prosthetic superstructure on the model
With the prosthetic superstructure
Supporting frame of the construct
Supporting frame
Mini-screws for fixation
Mini-screws for fixation
How it is made

From CT to framework

CT segmentation
01 / CT and segmentation / Anatomy and zones of dense bone
Design planning
02 / Planning / Support, fixation, abutment emergence
Framework design on the model
03 / Approval / The 3D fit is approved by the surgeon
SLM printing
04 / Manufacturing / Ti-6Al-4V, SLM printing
Kit with screws
05 / Kit / Framework, guide, model, prosthesis, screws
The patient's problem

“There is no bone — nothing can be done”

Long-standing edentulism, periodontitis, trauma or oncological resection lead to bone resorption. Progressive atrophy is a systemic problem: the face changes and chewing and speech are impaired. The patient has already been to several clinics and each time has been turned away or told that “a year of grafting is needed”.

Subperiosteal framework with abutments
The framework rests on the bone rather than entering it; the abutments emerge to support the prosthetic superstructure
Atrophy reference

When a subperiosteal implant may be considered

Bone conditionStandard implant placementBonabyte framework
Sufficient boneIndicatedUsually not required
Moderate atrophyOften requires bone graftingOptional
Severe atrophyDifficultMay be considered
Severe atrophyDifficult / not feasibleOne of the possible options

Atrophy classifications (for example, Cawood & Howell) are used as a reference. Indications, patient selection and the choice of method are determined by the oral or maxillofacial surgeon, taking the soft tissues and the clinical situation into account.

Evidence base

What the clinical data shows

97,1%

Implant survival at 5 years. Retrospective cohort study, n=150. Comparable with zygomatic implants (96.3%), with less peri-implantitis (5.6%).

Zielinski et al., J Clin Med 2025;14:661

95,2%

Survival with partial rehabilitation. 21 implants in 16 patients, median 36 months. Resorption beneath the abutments ≤0.18 mm per year.

Vaira LA et al., J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2025;83(6):728–737

risk

Mucosal recession is the key risk. The main factors are a thin biotype and mucositis. This data matters for the surgeon's preoperative assessment.

Van den Borre C et al., Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2024;39:302–309

An honest look at the risks. Soft tissue exposure is the main risk (thin biotype, smoking, mucositis); with careful patient selection it is manageable. The Bonabyte approach: precise digital adaptation of the framework, engineered smoothing of transition angles and surface polishing; agreement of the 3D fit with the surgeon and a stereolithographic model for intraoperative checking. We do not promise “no complications”.
Comparison of techniques

Alternatives in cases of atrophy

ParameterBone graftingAll-on-4 / ZygomaBonabyte implants
Bone requirementsReconstruction before placementMin. bone for tilted implantsSevere atrophy
Number of procedures2–3 stages1–2 stagesUsually 1 stage
Rehabilitation timeLongMediumShorter in selected cases
Nerve-related riskHigherModerateReduced
Sinus-related complicationsPossibleNot typical

This comparison is general in nature; the approach, timelines and risks are determined individually according to the clinical situation. In selected cases a subperiosteal implant may be considered as an alternative to multi-stage bone grafting.

Patient selection

Selection criteria

  • Severe alveolar ridge atrophy — confirmed by imaging
  • Sufficient keratinised mucosa — a thin biotype is the main predictor of exposure
  • No active inflammation — full dental treatment before surgery is mandatory
  • High compliance — professional hygiene every 3 months
Included

What you receive

  • Ti-6Al-4V subperiosteal framework (SLM printing)
  • Surgical guide
  • Anatomical / stereolithographic model
  • Temporary prosthesis
  • Fixation screws
Review a patient with atrophy
Documents and CT requirements

Download the protocol and materials

A correct CT scan speeds up planning and reduces rework. Download the protocol for this speciality and include a link to the DICOM when you send it.

FAQ

FAQ

It may be considered in severe alveolar ridge atrophy where standard implant placement is difficult or impossible. The quantity and condition of keratinised mucosa, the absence of active inflammation, oral hygiene and compliance all matter. Indications and patient selection are determined by the surgeon.

Multi-stage bone grafting can require a long wait and several procedures. In selected cases a subperiosteal implant may be considered as an alternative; timelines and approach depend on the clinical situation and the surgeon's decision.

The key risk is soft tissue exposure (recession); the main factors are a thin mucosal biotype, mucositis and smoking. With careful patient selection the risk is manageable. Any gap in the fit is a source of micromovement, which is why CAD/CAM accuracy is critical.

A Ti-6Al-4V titanium framework, SLM printing (laser metal fusion) and digital planning in BonaPlanner 3D. Fixation with mini-screws in zones of dense bone; the kit includes a surgical guide, an anatomical model, a temporary prosthesis and screws.

What you should know

Limits of what is possible

Bonabyte designs and manufactures the device according to the treating physician's plan. Medical decisions are made by the surgeon.

What we can do
  • assess the anatomy and zones of dense bone from the CT
  • design a framework supported by the bone
  • agree the fixation points and abutment emergence
  • manufacture the framework from Ti-6Al-4V titanium using SLM
What we cannot determine without the physician and the source data
  • the medical indications for implant placement
  • the patient's suitability for the procedure
  • the condition of the mucosa and soft tissues
  • the prosthetic plan
  • the prognosis of the clinical outcome
Related solutions

What else you may need

Have a complex case of atrophy?

Send us a CT — an engineer will analyse the anatomy and give an opinion on whether a subperiosteal implant is applicable. Free of charge, within 48 hours.

Sources and literature

Further reading on this topic

These publications are provided as a reference for professionals. They relate to the topic of this section and are not a guarantee of the outcome in any particular case; applicability is determined by the treating physician. The list should be reviewed and expanded by a clinical specialist.

  1. Retrospective analyses of additively manufactured subperiosteal jaw implants in the mandible (92.5% survival; Cawood–Howell IV–VII). J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2025. [source]
  2. Zielinski R, et al. Survival of subperiosteal implants — a retrospective cohort study (n=150). J Clin Med. 2025;14:661. [source]
  3. Vaira LA, et al. Subperiosteal implants — partial rehabilitation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2025;83(6):728–737. [source]
  4. Van den Borre C, et al. Risk factors for exposure (multicentre study). Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2024;39:302–309. [source]

The information on this website is intended for healthcare professionals and does not constitute medical advice, a public offer or a guarantee of clinical outcome. Bonabyte devices are custom-made medical devices designed for a specific clinical task; their applicability depends on the CT data, the anatomy, the condition of the soft tissues, the surgical access and the operative plan. The final decision on the use of a device is made by the treating physician. Contraindications exist and an individual assessment of the clinical situation is required.