Abstract
The aim of this study was to clinically and radiographically compare extra short and standards implants. Forty-two implants were installed in 10 selected patients. They received prosthetic loading only after the conventional waiting time for osseointegration and the prostheses were made ferulized. Radiographic shots were performed to evaluate vertical and horizontal bone losses at times T1 (prosthetic installation), T2 (6 months follow-up) and T3 (12 months follow-up). Biological parameters such as bone level around the implants (CBL) were evaluated, CBL alteration (CBLC), total crown length (TCL) and implant/crown ratio (ICR) were digitally calculated. All implants included in the study were submitted to the analysis of the implant stability quotient (ISQ) at the time of implant installation (T0) and at 12 months of prosthetic function (T3). Data were statistically tested. The ICR was higher in the test group than in the control group (p<0.0001). The CBL measurements at the beginning of the study were 0.21±0.19 mm and 0.32±0.38 mm and at 12 months 0.65±0.24 mm and 0.87±0.34 mm, respectively in the test and control groups. CBLCs and CBL were similar at all times (p>0.05). No correlation was found between CBLC and ICR parameters, as well as between ISQ and implant length. We may conclude that standards and extra short implants can provide similar clinical results in prosthetic rehabilitation of the atrophic jaw over 12 months of follow-up.
Highlights
One or more absences in the posterior mandible is a common defect found in clinical practice
Authors describe that 4 to 6 mm length implants are defined as extra short implants, 6 to 8 mm length implants are defined as short implants and higher of 8 mm length implants are defined as standard implants [3,4]
A total of 42 implants were installed, 21 implants in the test group (Extra Short Implant) and 21 implants in the control group (Standard Implant) were followed for 12 months and no biological complications were observed during this period
Summary
One or more absences in the posterior mandible is a common defect found in clinical practice. The posterior regions of the jaws offer anatomical limitations that hinder or even prevent the rehabilitation treatment with conventional dental implants due to the lack of sufficient bone height for their placement. These limitations arise mainly from the positioning of the mandibular canal, mental foramen and maxillary sinus. Some randomized clinical trials do not report a significant difference between extra short implants and standard implants (>8 mm) in the posterior region of the jaw [3,4]. A retrospective study reported that the 5-year survival rate for extra short implants was 98.7% and the 10-year survival rate was 98.3%, which indicated that extra short implants had a reliable long-term effect [4]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
