Use Of Short Dental Implants Research Articles

Short dental implants

Short dental implants have been successfully used to support single and multiple fixed reconstructions in atrophic jaws, despite an increased crown-to-implant ratio. The use of short dental implants allows the treatment of patients for whom complex surgical techniques cannot be performed for medical, anatomical, or financial reasons. Furthermore, the use of short dental implants in clinical practice reduces morbidity, cost, and treatment time and reduces the need for complex surgery. The aim of this review is to evaluate the survival rates of short and extra-short dental implants and to discuss the impact of an increased crown-to-implant ratio on biologic and technical complications.

Short Dental Implants (5 to 7 mm) with Expandable Apex in the Posterior Maxilla-Preliminary Results.

The purpose of this study was to examine whether the use of short dental implants with an expandable compressive design could be a proper alternative to the conventional sinus elevation procedure in cases of deficient alveolar ridge height in the posterior maxillary area. Fifty patients with 73 short dental implants with an expandable compressive design who were treated for posterior maxillary alveolar ridges of 5 to 7 mm in the vertical dimension between 2012 and 2018 were included in a retrospective study. All patients had a minimum postrehabilitation period of 1 year. Patient demographics, implant properties, primary stability, and implant success and survival rates were analyzed. The total success rate was 97.2%, with two failed implants at implant uncovering. The mean bone loss was 1.03 mm. No difference in bone loss was found between sexes or age groups. The results of this study suggest that short dental implants with an expandable apical compressive design could be an alternative to sinus elevation procedures in selected cases of vertically deficient maxillary alveolar ridges.

Imedijatno opterećenje kratkih implantata u stražnjem dijelu gornje čeljusti: prikazi slučajeva

BackgroundThere is an increasing number of scientific evidence supporting the clinical use of short dental implants. However, few studies have evaluated the long-term outcomes of immediate loading protocols in short implants. This study aims to evaluate immediate loading of short dental implants in the posterior regions of the maxillae.Materials and methodsPatients having short implants in maxillae posterior areas inserted before December, 2010 and immediately loaded were selected. The following data were gathered regarding patients’ age and gender, implant dimensions, anatomical location, and prosthodontic treatment. The outcome variables were peri-implant bone remodeling and the survival rates of the short implants and the prosthesis.ResultsA 10 short implants were placed in 8 patients. The mean follow-up time was 4.6 ± 1.21 years after loading and 1 implant failed. One prosthetic complication occurred. No prostheses failed resulting in a survival rate of 100%.ConclusionsThe immediate loading of short implants in maxillae posterior areas could save time, cost and could be regarded as a successful treatment.

Treatment concepts for the posterior maxilla and mandible: short implants versus long implants in augmented bone.

The aim of this narrative review is to describe treatment options for the posterior regions of the mandible and the maxilla, comparing short implants vs. longer implants in an augmented bone. The dental literature was screened for treatment options enabling the placement of dental implants in posterior sites with a reduced vertical bone height in the maxilla and the mandible. Short dental implants have been increasingly used recently, providing a number of advantages including reduced patient morbidity, shorter treatment time, and lower costs. In the posterior maxilla, sinus elevation procedures were for long considered to be the gold standard using various bone substitute materials and rendering high implant survival rates. More recently, implants were even placed without any further use of bone substitute materials, but the long-term outcomes have yet to be documented. Vertical bone augmentation procedures in the mandible require a relatively high level of surgical skill and allow the placement of standard-length dental implants by the use of autogenous bone blocks. Both treatment options, short dental implants, and standard-length implants in combination with vertical bone augmentation procedures, appear to result in predictable outcomes in terms of implant survival rates. According to recent clinical studies comparing the therapeutic options of short implants vs. long implants in augmented bone, the use of short dental implants leads to a number of advantages for the patients and the clinician.

Outcomes of placing short implants in the posterior mandible: a preliminary randomized controlled trial.

Short dental implants can be an alternative to bone augmentation procedures at sites of reduced alveolar bone. Most studies on short implants are retrospective or multicentre reports that lack controlled and consistent comparison between different systems. This study aimed to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of short implants in two different systems in the posterior mandible. Twenty patients with two adjacent missing posterior teeth were recruited. Patients were assigned equally and randomly into two groups; Bicon(®) (6 or 8 mm) and Ankylos(®) (8 mm) implants. A two-stage surgical approach and singlecrowns were used for implant placement and loading. Outcomes included peri-implant clinical parameters, implant stability (Periotest values; PTVs) and peri-implant bone changes, which were assessed at baseline, 2, 6 and 12 months post-loading. No implant loss was encountered up to 12 months post-loading. No significant difference in the clinical or radiographic parameters was observed except for PTVs (p < 0.05) that was lower in Ankylos(®) implants. The use ofshort dental implants was associated with excellent 12 months clinical and radiographic outcomes.Ankylos(®) and Bicon(®) implants demonstrated similar peri-implant soft tissue and alveolar bone changes. However,Ankylos(®) implants demonstrated better implant stability at all evaluation intervals.

Histologic and histomorphometric study of bone repair around short dental implants inserted in rabbit tibia, associated with tricalcium phosphate graft bone

The use of short dental implants represents one way to overcome this limitation, in association with bone grafting procedures. Tricalcium phosphate-based grafts are among those widely used. The purpose of this study was to assess the biocompatibility of this biomaterial in the coverage of bone defects around short dental implants. Ten New Zealandrabbits were used in this study, each animal received 4 implants, two were placed in the right tibia region (control group) and two in the left tibia region (test group). Forty implants were used, with 4mm diameter and 6mm length. For the control group, holes 6 mmdeep were made, and the implants were then inserted at the level of bone tissue. In the control group, the implants of 6 mmin length were inserted to its full length, while in the test group, the same implant was inserted up to 4 mmand left exposed 2 mm. These 2 mmexposed were coated with a bone substitute of tricalcium phosphate and a collagen membrane. After three months, the animals were prepared for histomorphometric analysis, which showed that the control group had a higher number of osteoblasts per μm 2 than the test group (p < 0.001). It was concluded that under these experimental conditions, tricalcium phosphate showed tissue biocompatibility and osteoconductive potential.

Influence of Crown/Implant Ratio on Marginal Bone Loss: A Systematic Review

With the increased use of short dental implants (<10 mm), a high crown/implant (C/I) ratio has become a common finding. However, the effect of the C/I ratio on the marginal bone loss (MBL) has not yet been examined extensively. Hence, the aim of the present systematic review is to explore the influence of the C/I ratio on the success rate and MBL of dental implants. Three electronic databases (PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central) and a manual search for human trials with a minimal follow-up of 6 months are used for the present study. A statistical analysis of the influence of the C/I ratio was performed on the peri-implant MBL while considering follow-up period, type of implants, implant connection, and technical and biologic complications. One hundred ninety-six potential articles were identified on the selected databases. Only 57 articles were selected for full-text evaluation. According to the inclusion criteria, a total of 13 articles were included in this systematic review. A significant negative association between the C/I ratio and the MBL was found (P = 0.012). However, no statistically significant difference was found (P >0.15) for potential effects regarding the observation period, the type of implant connection, or between both methods of evaluating the C/I ratio. Within the limitations of the present study, the C/I ratio of implant-supported restorations has an effect on peri-implant marginal bone level. Within the range of 0.6/1 to 2.36/1, the higher the C/I ratio, the less the peri-implant MBL.

Short dental implants in reduced alveolar bone height: A review of the literature

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of short dental implants in distally reduced alveolar bone height.Material/MethodsMedLine (PubMed and Ovid), ISI Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane databases were used for analysis. Searching was conducted using the search equation: ‘Dental Implants’ [Majr] AND (Short[TIAB] OR Shorter[TIAB]) AND (Implant[TIAB] OR Implants[TIAB]). s were screened by 2 independent reviewers. The articles included in the analysis were published in the English language and reported data on the use of implants with lengths below 10 mm in the posterior region with reduced alveolar bone height making the placement of longer implants impossible without additional surgical interventions. Articles concerning data on orthodontic implants and post-resection surgery reconstruction were excluded from analysis. Any disagreements between the 2 reviewers were resolved by a third reviewer. No time frame was used.ResultsOf the 791 articles initially found, automatic rejection of duplicates in the Endnotes X5 software resulted in 538 articles. After the selection of studies from databases, a bibliography of 32 eligible articles was searched for other publications. Through this method, 2 more studies were added.ConclusionsThe analysis of the results of different studies on the use of short dental implants showed that this treatment could be effective and comparable to the use of standard-length implants. This study revealed that rough-surfaced implants with lengths between 6–10 mm placed in the posterior mandible are the preferred solution. However, more detailed data will require additional prospective studies.

The evidence for endorsing the use of short dental implants remains inconclusive

Medline and Embase databases were searched between 1980 and October 2009 using free text and MeSH terms. Reference lists of retrieved publications were checked. Randomised-controlled trials or prospective cohort studies were eligible that included partially edentulous patients in whom at least five implants (each of length <10mm) were placed and where follow up was >1 year. Main outcomes were estimated failure rate per year and the estimated implant survival rate after two years. Failure was defined as implant removal due to loss of integration, implant mobility, symptoms as pain, neuropathies, paraesthesia, violation of the mandibular canal or psychological reason. Studies designated as 'methodologically unacceptable' were excluded. This was based on the validity assessment described below. One reviewer extracted data from all included trials and another extracted from 25% of them. Validity of included studies was assessed using 'quality assessment of a cohort study' and 'quality assessment of a randomised clinical trial' developed by the Dutch Cochrane Centre. Authors were contacted by email when there were missing data. Sources of heterogeneity were explored using stratified analyses for the determinants surface topography, location (maxilla versus mandible), smoking and bone augmentation procedures. Twenty-nine studies were eligible including 2611 short implants (lengths 5, 6, 7, 8, 8.5, 9 and 9.5 mm). Twenty-eight were prospective cohort studies and one was a randomised controlled trial. The authors do not present a summary of the quality of the studies. The mean follow up was 3.7 years (range 1.6 - 8.1 years). There was mild to moderate heterogeneity between the studies depending on the length of the implants placed. The estimated survival rate after two years ranged from 93.1% (95% CI: 79.7-100%) for 5mm implants to 98.6% (95% CI: 94.6-100%) for 9.5mm implants. There is growing evidence that placement of short (<10mm) implants can be successful in the partially edentulous patient.

Impact of dental implant length on early failure rates: a meta-analysis of observational studies

To test the null hypothesis of no difference in failure rates of short (minimum length: 7 mm) and longer dental implants (≥ 10 mm), a meta-analysis was performed on prospective observational trials. A systematic electronic and hand search was performed to identify eligible studies. Having additional data supplied by the authors, 54 publications were included (19,083 implants). In case of mandibular implants, the null hypothesis of no impact of reduced implant length on failure within the first year of prosthetic loading could not be rejected. A significant impact of implant length could be substantiated for short machined implants in the anterior [odds ratio (OR) 5.4] and posterior maxilla (OR 3.4), while short rough-surfaced implants demonstrated increased failure rates in the anterior maxillary sites. No influence of implant diameter and denture type on the failure rate of short implants could be revealed. In areas of reduced alveolar bone height the use of short dental implants may reduce the need for invasive bone augmentation procedures.

Alternatives to the sinus lift: short implants

The surgical management of posterior maxilla is a challenge to the professional. Currently the sinus lift is probably the first treatment choice on the rehabilitation with implants of the atrophic posterior maxilla. The sinus lift has demonstrated to be a reliable technique in the management of these patients. Unfortunately, this technique can be accompanied by higher economic costs, morbidity and risk of sinusitis. However, the use of short implants (<10 mm) traditionally has been associated with lower survival rates than long implants, but the use of short dental implants with a sintered porous surface is a simple and reliable alternative when there is a contraindication to sinus lift. We present our experience with very short implants. Over the past 18 months a total of 37 implants have been installed to restore the posterior maxilla. All implants were 5 mm in diameter and had a length of 5 to 7 mm. In our series the Summers’ technique was not used in any case. In 3 cases the submerged technique was used. The period of integration has been between 3 and 6 months. Immediate loading was not realised in any case. Of the whole of installed implants, 29 were loaded and 8 are in process of osseointegration. Only one case of a 5 × 5 mm implant had not integrated during the prosthetic phase. A detailed explanation of the surgical technique of these implants is also exposed (in this case Endopore, Dental Implant System, Innova Corporation, Toronto, Canada) as well as an updated review of its use.