Full-arch implant-supported rehabilitations are widely recognized as an effective treatment option for edentulous patients. Nevertheless, clinical decision-making regarding patient selection, surgical planning, prosthetic material choice, and long-term maintenance protocols remains heterogeneous and requires structured evidence-based guidance. A modified Delphi consensus process was conducted involving 29 experts during the Italian Consensus Conference. A systematic literature review covering the period 2015–2024 was performed, and the certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Consensus was predefined as ≥90% agreement. Seven evidence-based consensus statements were developed addressing: (1) periodontal risk assessment using validated tools; (2) guided bone regeneration outcomes with technique-specific indications; (3) comparative survival of four versus six implants in mandibular full-arch rehabilitations; (4) equivalence of tilted and axial implant configurations; (5) prosthetic material selection, with monolithic zirconia showing high survival; (6) risk-stratified supportive maintenance protocols associated with a reduction in peri-implantitis incidence; and (7) systemic risk stratification, including absolute and relative contraindications, medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) risk management, and perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis.
Rapone et al. (Mon,) studied this question.