Analysis of ultra-short implants with different angulations: a retrospective case-control study with 2 to 9 years of follow-up.

OBJECTIVES: Does the angulation of ultrashort implants influence the stability of the peri-implant bone? The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of non-axial ultrashort implants after 2 to 9 years of follow-up in resorbed alveolar ridges. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All partially edentulous patients with ultrashort implants (< 6 mm) used in the posterior region of an atrophic mandible or maxilla, to support partial dentures in conjunction with standard implants, were included in this study. Peri-implant bone loss, success and survival rates, crestal bone levels, crown-to-implant ratio and implant angulation were measured for each implant. Implants were divided into two groups: straight implants with angulation < 17° (control group) and tilted implants with angulation > 17° (test group). Statistical analysis was used to find any significant differences between the two study groups and to investigate significant linear correlations among all the variables (p = 0.05). RESULTS: A total of 42 ultrashort implants with a mean of 4 years of follow-up were included: 20 ultrashort axially loaded implants and 22 tilted implants. Mean crestal bone levels from baseline loading to maximum follow-up did not reveal statistical differences in regard to PBL; mean success and survival rates were 100% in all groups. CONCLUSIONS: PBL, success and survival rates of axial ultrashort implants and tilted ultrashort implants are comparable to those of conventional implants. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This retrospective study revealed that ultrashort implants, even when placed with an angulation > 17°, can safely be used to support partial fixed prostheses. Further prospective clinical studies with larger samples and prospective design are needed to confirm these findings.

Anatomically Driven Immediate Implant Placement in the Esthetic Zone: Two Case Reports as Proof of Principle.

Achieving favorable and stable esthetic outcomes with immediate implants used to replace maxillary anterior teeth can be challenging. Osteotomies need to be initiated along the palatal socket wall, and it is often difficult to stabilize initial drilling. An immediate implant was planned for a hopeless maxillary incisor. Using a flapless surgery technique, the tooth was removed and decoronated, and an entry point was made in the root to guide the osteotomy drills. The root was reinserted and stabilized while a precision drill and 2-mm twist drill were used in sequence to drill through the tooth root, establishing the osteotomy location but stopping 3-4 mm short of final depth. The root was then removed, and the final implant bur for a 3.5 × 11.5-mm implant was drilled to depth, engaging the necessary native bone apically. The original tooth crown was then used to prepare and insert a transitional crown. Reinserting the extracted root of a maxillary anterior tooth and using it as a guide for osteotomy preparation is an excellent method to optimally position an immediate implant palatally in the socket wall.

Three-dimensional finite element analysis of stress distribution on short implants with different bone conditions and osseointegration rates.

OBJECTIVE: This experiment aimed to investigate the effects of bone conditions and osseointegration rates on the stress distribution of short implants using finite element analysis and also to provide some reference for the application of short implants from a biomechanical prospect. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Anisotropic jaw bone models with three bone conditions and 4.1 × 6 mm implant models were created, and four osseointegration rates were simulated. Stress and strain for the implants and jaws were calculated during vertical or oblique loading. RESULTS: The cortical bone area around the implant neck was most stressed. The maximum von Mises stress in cortical bone increased with bone deterioration and osseointegration rate, with maximum values of 144.32 MPa and 203.94 MPa for vertical and inclined loading, respectively. The osseointegration rate had the greatest effect on the maximum principal stress in cortical bone of type III bone, with its value increasing by 63.8% at a 100% osseointegration rate versus a 25% osseointegration rate. The maximum and minimum principal stresses under inclined load are 1.3 ~ 1.7 and 1.4 ~ 1.8 times, respectively, those under vertical load. The stress on the jaw bone did not exceed the threshold when the osseointegration rate was ≥ 50% for Type II and 100% for Type III. High strain zones are found in cancellous bone, and the maximum strain increases as the bone condition deteriorate and the rate of osseointegration decreases. CONCLUSIONS: The maximum stress in the jaw bone increases as the bone condition deteriorates and the osseointegration rate increases. Increased osseointegration rate reduces cancellous bone strain and improves implant stability without exceeding the yield strength of the cortical bone. When the bone condition is good, and the osseointegration ratio is relatively high, 6 mm short implants can be used. In clinical practice, incline loading is an unfavorable loading condition, and axial loading should be used as much as possible.

LIMITED EVIDENCE SUGGESTS SURVIVAL OF NON-SPLINTED SHORT IMPLANTS (≤8.5 MM) IS COMPARABLE TO THAT OF SPLINTED IMPLANTS.

ARTICLE TITLE AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION: Li QL, Yao MF, Cao RY, Zhao K, Wang XD. Survival Rates of Splinted and Nonsplinted Prostheses Supported by Short Dental Implants (≤8.5 mm): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Prosthodont. 2022;31(1):9-21. doi:10.1111/jopr.13402. Epub 2021 Jul 16. PMID:34160869. SOURCE OF FUNDING: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under grants No. 82071156, No. 81470767, and No. 81271175. TYPE OF STUDY/DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis of data (SRMA).

Long-term clinical outcomes of short implant (6mm) in relation to Implant Disease Risk Assessment (IDRA).

AIM: To evaluate the long-term survival of short implants and to investigate the association of the Implant Disease Risk Assessment (IDRA) with the occurrence of biological complications. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study was designed as a cohort study with a median follow-up of 10.0 years. Patients who had received 6-mm implants were reviewed and assigned into low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups (Group L, M, and H) based on the IDRA tool. The implant survival, biological complications, soft tissue condition, hardware complications, and marginal bone loss (MBL) were evaluated. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression were performed for survival analysis. RESULTS: A hundred and ten patients were included. The overall cumulative survival rate was 90.9% (L:100.0%, M: 93.3%, and H: 80.6%). A higher risk profile was significantly associated with a decreased implant survival (hazard ratio: 4.11, 95% CI: 1.17-14.36, p < .05). Higher risk profile (hazard ratio: 2.63, 95% CI: 1.32-5.25, p < .05) was a potential risk factor for biological complications. At follow-up, significant differences in bleeding index, modified plaque index, and peri-implant probing depth were found among groups (p < .01). No significant difference was found in MBL. CONCLUSION: Acceptable long-term clinical outcomes could be achieved after 10 years for short implants. Despite a statistically nonsignificant difference in MBL, patients with a high-risk profile of IDRA seem to be at greater risk of implant loss and biological complications.

Short Versus Regular-Length Implants to Rehabilitate Partially Edentulous Mandible: A 2-Year Prospective Split-Mouth Clinical Study.

Many studies have evaluated short implants (SIs); however, it is still unclear whether SIs are reliable and can be used to simplify surgical and prosthetic protocols with successful clinical outcomes. The aim of this nonrandom, conveniently sampled, prospective, split-mouth study was to compare the clinical outcomes when short SI (≤8 mm) or regular-length implants (RIs; >10 mm) were used in the posterior mandible 2 years after the delivery of splinted reconstructions. Each participant (N = 10) received 4 implants in the posterior mandible; 2 SIs were placed on one side, and 2 RIs were placed contralaterally. Implants were restored with splinted, screw-retained, porcelain-fused-to-metal reconstructions. Survival and success rates, peri-implant marginal bone level (MBL), and soft-tissue parameters were evaluated. No participant dropouts were recorded. Both types of implants showed 100% success and survival rates. From prosthetic delivery to 24 months postloading, bone remineralization of +0.40 mm for the SIs and +0.36 mm for the RIs was observed without statistically significant differences in MBL between the implant types (P = .993). SIs showed significantly higher (P = .001) clinical attachment level and probing depth values. Chipping occurred in one situation in the RI group, resulting in a 97.5% prosthetic success rate, which was 100% for the SIs. After 2 years, SIs with splinted reconstructions showed comparable clinical outcomes to those of RIs. Further long-term controlled clinical studies with balanced experimental designs evaluating random and larger populations are required to corroborate these findings.

Bone quality effect on short implants in the edentulous mandible: a finite element study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to verify whether the use of short implants could optimize stress distribution of bone surrounding implants in atrophic mandibles with different bone qualities. METHODS: A three-dimensional model of the atrophic mandible with three levels of bone quality was made using computer software. Short implants (6 mm) and standard implants (10 mm) were used in four designs: Design 1 "All-On four", Design 2 "All-On-four" with two short implants, Design 3 four vertical implants with two short implants, and Design 4 six short implants. The distal short implants were placed at the first molar position. All twelve models were imported into finite element analysis software, and 110 N oblique force was loaded on the left second premolar. Maximum principal stress values of peri-implant bone and the volumes of bone with over 3000 microstrians (overload)were analyzed. RESULT: Stress values and volumes of overload bone increased in all four groups with the decline of bone quality. The highest stress values were found in the cortical bone surrounding the Design 1 inclined implant in two lower bone quality mandibles, and the lowest in Design 3. However, Design 1 had less overload bone tissue than all three designs with short implants. CONCLUSION: Short implants placed posteriorly helped decrease stress values in peri-implant bone, while bone surrounding short implants had a high resorption risk in low bone quality mandible.

Survival Rates of Splinted and Nonsplinted Prostheses Supported by Short Dental Implants (≤8.5 mm): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the implant survival rates, marginal bone loss, and mechanical complications of prostheses supported by splinted and nonsplinted short implants (≤8.5 mm). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Electronic database (MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and EMBASE) and manual searches up to May 2021 were conducted to identify studies comparing splinted and nonsplinted short implants (≤8.5 mm). The primary outcome was implant survival rate. Secondary outcomes were marginal bone loss and mechanical complications. The quality of included studies and risk-of-bias were assessed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random-effects model was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Twelve studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and featured 1506 short implants (596 nonsplinted and 910 splinted) with a follow-up time ranging from 1 to 16 years. Quantitative analysis found no statistically significant differences between splinted and nonsplinted short implants (≤8.5 mm) for survival rate (RR = 0.98; 95% CI 0.96, 1.01; p = 0.26)) and marginal bone loss (SMD = -0.08; 95% CI - 0.23, 0.07; p = 0.28). Veneer chipping, abutment screw breakage, screw loosening, and loss of retention were reported in the selected studies as common complications. However, no statistically significant difference was found between splinted and nonsplinted short implants (RR = 0.56; 95% CI 0.20, 1.54; p = 0.26). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of the present meta-analysis, it might be concluded that splinted short implants (≤8.5 mm) do not present superior performance in survival rate, marginal bone maintenance and prevention of mechanical complications compared with single-unit prostheses.

Two short implants versus one short implant with a cantilever: 5-Year results of a randomized clinical trial.

AIM: To test whether or not the use of a short implant with a cantilever results in similar clinical and radiographic outcomes compared to two adjacent short implants with single tooth reconstructions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six patients with two adjacent missing teeth in the posterior region were randomly assigned to receive either a single 6-mm implant with a cantilever (ONE-C) or two 6-mm implants (TWO). Fixed reconstructions were inserted 3-6 months after implant placement and patients were re-examined up to 5 years (FU-5). RESULTS: A total of 26 patients were available for re-examination at FU-5. The survival rate amounted to 84.2% in ONE-C and to 80.4% in TWO (inter-group: p = .894). Technical complication rates amounted to 64.2% (ONE-C) and to 54.4% (TWO) (inter-group: p = 1.000). From baseline to FU-5, the median changes of the marginal bone levels were 0.13 mm in ONE-C and 0.05 mm in TWO (inter-group: p = .775). Probing depth, bleeding on probing, and plaque control record values showed no significant differences between the two treatment modalities (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Short implants with a cantilever render similar clinical and radiographic outcomes compared to two adjacent short implants at 5 years, however, they tend to fail at earlier time points suggesting an overload of the implants. Considering the modest survival rates, the clinical indication of either treatment option needs to be carefully evaluated. ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01649531).

Clinical, radiographic and economic evaluation of short-6-mm implants and longer implants combined with osteotome sinus floor elevation in moderately atrophic maxillae: A 3-year randomized clinical trial.

AIM: To compare the 3-year clinical, radiographic and economic outcomes of short-6-mm implants and longer implants combined with osteotome sinus floor elevation (OSFE) in the posterior maxilla. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study enrolled 225 patients (225 implants with diameter of 4.1 mm and 4.8 mm) with a posterior maxillary residual bone height (RBH) of 6-8 mm. Patients were randomly divided into three groups: Group 1 (6 mm implants alone), Group 2 (8 mm implants + OSFE) and Group 3 (10 mm implants + OSFE). The following outcomes were recorded at 1 and 3-year examinations: implant survival, probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BOP), modified plaque index (mPI), marginal bone loss (MBL), biological and technical complications, complication-free survival and treatment costs. RESULTS: At the 3-year follow-up, 199 patients (Group 1: 67; Group 2: 62; Group 3: 70) were re-examined. Implant survival rates were 91.80%, 97.08% and 100.00% in groups 1, 2 and 3. Implant survival rate in Group 1 was significantly lower than that in Group 3 (p = 0.029). A multivariate Cox model showed that the short-6-mm implants with wide diameter had a protective effect on implant survival (hazard ratio: 0.59, p = 0.001). No significant differences in BOP%, PPD, mPI, MBL and complication-free survival rate were found among the three groups. The average costs of retreatment were 8.31%, 1.96% and 0.56% of the total costs in groups 1, 2 and 3. The cost to avoid a 1% increase in implant loss associated with 6-mm implants over a 3-year period was 369 CNY (56 USD) using a 10-mm implant with OSFE and 484 CNY (74 USD) using an 8-mm implant with OSFE. CONCLUSION: In the moderately atrophic posterior maxillae, the three treatments showed acceptable clinical, radiographic and economic outcomes with up to 3-year follow-up. 10-mm implants combined with OSFE showed more favourable implant survival and fewer maintenance costs in comparison with short-6-mm implants, which were less expensive.

Clinical performance of short versus standard dental implants in vertically augmented bone: an overview of systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE: To answer the question: What do we know so far about the clinical performance of short implants (≤ 7 mm) when compared to standard length implants in vertically augmented bone, as well as which is the overall confidence of the systematic reviews (SRs) about this topic? MATERIALS AND METHODS: An overview of SRs was conducted. The searches were performed in six electronic databases and grey literature. SRs about short (≤ 7 mm) versus standard dental implants performance in vertically augmented bone were included. The assessed outcomes were marginal bone loss (MBL), implant survival (IS), prosthetic (PC) and biological complications (BC), costs, surgical time, and patient satisfaction. AMSTAR 2 was used to evaluate the overall confidence of included SRs. RESULTS: Thirteen SRs were included. Nine of twelve SRs reported a lower MBL for the short implant group. All the included SRs showed no difference in the IS between groups. A higher rate of BC was reported for standard-length implants in four out of five SRs. No differences regarding PC were reported in four of five SRs. Information related to patient preference, cost, and surgery time were underreported. The confidence evaluation of the SRs was stratified as low for five SRs and critically low for eight SRs. CONCLUSIONS: In an overall low-to-very low confidence levels, short implants appear to perform better in the mid-term (up to 5 years) than standard dental implants associated with vertical bone augmentation regarding MBL and BC, but they have a similar performance regarding IS rates and PC. There is an imperative need to improve the methodological quality of SRs, and efforts should focus on conducting RCTs to broaden the knowledge on this topic. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Short implants could represent a viable, simpler, and less invasive treatment when available bone height is limited.

Evaluating the effect of subcrestal placement on platform switched short dental implants and von mises stress in D3 bone-A 3D FEM study.

AIM: To investigate the effect of platform switched short dental implants and subcrestal placement on von Mises stress in the maxillary anterior region (D3 bone) by using three-dimensional finite element model analyses (3D FEM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Biomechanical behaviour of von Mises stress in maxillary anterior region (D3) bone were stimulated with the help of 3D FEM with the help of ANSYS WORKBENCH version 17.5. The bone model had a cortical core of (1 mm) surrounding the inner cancellous core, which represents D3 bone. Two models were designed model 1 (6 x 4.6 mm), (7.5 x 4.6 mm) and model 2 (6 x 5.8 mm), (7.5 x 5.8 mm). Loads of 100, 200 N were applied at an angle of 0°, 15°, 30° along the long axis of the tooth model. RESULTS: In all model's cortical bone exhibited greater stress than cancellous bone. Greater stress was reported in axial direction at 30° then 15° and least at 0° irrespective of load applied. An increase in implant length (7.5 mm) did not exhibit any stress reduction in both the model but implant diameter (5.8 mm) led to reduction in von Mises stress in both the groups. Greater the force applied greater was stress in both bones irrespective of direction of force applied (200N). Lastly subcrestal (0.5 mm) placement has slight reduction in stress compared to equicrestal placement in both the groups. CONCLUSION: Numerical results from the current study suggest that, for short implants, implant diameter is considered more effective design parameter than implant length. Current findings state that platform switch short subcrestal implants results in conservation of marginal bone loss along with better stress distribution around peri-implant regions in D3 bone. However, all models analyzed in this study showed development of von Mesies stresses within physiological limits for human cortical bone.

Rehabilitation of a severe mandibular atrophy with four millimeter extra-short implant and guided bone regeneration (GBR): case report with 7-years follow-up.

The aim of this study was to report the use of extra-short and short implants in combination with Guided Bone Regeneration (GBR) to rehabilitate a case of severe mandibular reabsorption. A 55-yearold female patient asked for a fixed implant supported rehabilitation in 4.5 - 4.6 zone which showed severe atrophy. It was decided to use an extra-short 4 mm length and 4.1 mm Ø, Roxolid and SLActive implant (Straumann Standard Plus Regular Neck, Institut Straumann AG) in 4.5 position and a short 6 mm length and 4.8 mm Ø, Roxolid and SLActive implant (Straumann Standard Plus Wide Neck, Institut Straumann AG) in 4.6 position. The implants supported cemented fixed prosthesis. Examinations were performed at the day of the surgery and up to 7-years in function to evaluate implant stability and periapical radiography. One extra-short implant and one short implant were placed. After 7 years in function no biological or prosthetic complication were recorded. Within the limitation of this case report, the use of short and extra-short implants to support fixed prosthesis seem to be a feasible treatment alternative in severe mandibular atrophy.

Short implants and platelet-rich fibrin for transcrestal sinus floor elevation: a prospective multicenter clinical study.

INTRODUCTION: Inadequacy of residual bone height due to sinus pneumatization and alveolar bone remodeling could jeopardize the option for implant supported rehabilitation in posterior atrophied maxillae. AIM: The aim of this prospective, multi-centric clinical study is to investigate and assess the survival rate of short implants in single posterior maxillae atrophied sites with adjacent natural teeth, when augmented with leukocyte and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) alone using a minimally invasive trans-crestal approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-four short implants were installed in 53 patients with residual bone height (RBH) <4mm using piezoelectric ultrasonic guided sinus elevation by transcrestal approach. Six perforations of the sinus membrane occurred (11.3% perforation rate), out of which five were managed by using just L-PRF as grafting material. Postoperatively, the implants were clinically evaluated for survival rate. The cumulative implant survival rate was 93.3% at the end of first year of follow-up. Considering 2 dropouts by the end of 2nd year follow-up, and no further implant loss, the cumulative survival rate remained 93.3% up to 5 years follow-up period. DISCUSSION: The use of L-PRF plug as grafting and careful preparation of osteotomy site with piezoelectric ultrasonic device could allow for simultaneous crestal sinus floor elevation and short implant installation in posterior atrophied maxillae with RBH <4mm, extending the indications for implant rehabilitation.

Short versus longer implants with osteotome sinus floor elevation for moderately atrophic posterior maxillae: A 1-year randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: To compare the clinical, radiographic outcomes and patient satisfaction of short-6-mm implants and longer implants combined with osteotome sinus floor elevation (OSFE). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred and twenty-five patients with 225 implants were included and randomly assigned into three groups (each group: 75 implants) using randomizing table method: group 6 mm (6 mm implants alone), group 8 mm + O (8 mm implants + OSFE) and group 10 mm + O (10 mm implants + OSFE). Outcomes measures were as follows: implant survival, complication, resonance frequency analysis measurement, surgical time, bleeding on probing (BOP), pocket probing depth (PPD), modified plaque index (mPI), marginal bone loss (MBL) and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: The dropout rate was 3.6% at 1 year. Implant survival rates were 96%, 100% and 100% in group 6 mm, group 8 mm + O and group 10 mm + O, respectively. In group 6 mm, the survival rates of implants with diameter of 4.1 mm were 90% (27/30), while the survival rates of implants with diameter of 4.8 mm were 100% (42/42). The surgical time (min) in group 6 mm was significantly shorter than those in group 8 mm + O and group 10 mm + O (13.6 ± 2.2, 19.4 ± 3.7 and 18.3 ± 4.3, respectively, p = 0.03). No significant differences in ISQ values, BOP, PPD, mPI and MBL were found among three groups. Significant higher value of intra-operative discomfort was found in group 6 mm (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: All treatment options provided acceptable clinical and radiographic results up to 1 year after loading. The current 1-year results must be confirmed by longer follow-ups of at least 5 years.

Primary Stability of Short Implants Inserted Using Piezoelectric or Drilling Systems: An In Vitro Comparison.

The primary objective of the present in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of implant site preparation technique (drills vs ultrasonic instrumentation) on the primary stability of short dental implants with two different designs inserted in simulated low-quality cancellous bone. Eighty implant sites were prepared in custom-made solid rigid polyurethane blocks with two different low cancellous bone densities (5 or 15 pounds per cubic foot [PCF]), equally distributed between piezoelectric (Surgysonic Moto, Esacrom, Italy) and conventional drilling techniques. Two short implant systems (Prama and Syra, Sweden & Martina) were tested by inserting 40 fixtures of each system (both 6.0 mm length and 5.0 mm diameter), divided in the four subgroups (drills/5 PCF density; drills/15 PCF density; piezo/5 PCF density; piezo/15 PCF density). Insertion torque (Ncm), implant stability quotient values, removal torque (Ncm), and surgical time were recorded. Data were analyzed by 3-way ANOVA and Scheffé's test (α = 0.05). With slight variations among the considered dependent variables, overall high primary implant stability was observed across all subgroups. Piezoelectric instrumentation allowed for comparable or slightly superior primary stability in comparison with the drilling procedures in both implant systems. The Prama implants group showed the highest mean reverse torque and Syra implants the highest implant stability quotient values. Piezoelectric implant site preparation took prolonged operative time compared to conventional preparation with drills; among the drilling procedures, Syra system required fewer surgical steps and shorter operative time.

Primary stability of short implants inserted using piezoelectric or drilling systems: an in vitro comparison.

The primary objective of the present in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of implant site preparation technique (drills vs. ultrasonic instrumentation) on the primary stability of short dental implants with two different designs inserted in simulated low quality cancellous bone. Eighty implant sites were prepared in custom-made solid rigid polyurethane blocks with two different low cancellous bone densities (5 or 15 pounds per cubic foot, PCF), equally distributed between piezoelectric (Surgysonic Moto, Esacrom, Italy) and conventional drilling techniques. Two short implant systems (Prama and Syra, Sweden & Martina) were tested by inserting 40 fixtures of each system (both 6.0 mm length and 5.0 mm diameter), divided in the four subgroups (drills/5 PCF density; drills/15 PCF density; piezo/5 PCF density; piezo/15 PCF density). Insertion torque (Ncm), implant stability quotient values, removal torque (Ncm) and surgical time were recorded. Data were analyzed by three-way ANOVA and Scheffé's test (α=0.05). With slight variations among the considered dependent variables, overall high primary implant stability was observed across all subgroups. Piezoelectric instrumentation allowed for comparable or slightly superior primary stability in comparison with the drilling procedures in both implant systems. Prama implants group showed the highest mean reverse torque, Syra implants the highest implant stability quotient values. Piezoelectric implant site preparation took prolonged operative time compared to conventional preparation with drills; among the drilling procedures, Syra system requires fewer surgical steps and shorter operative time.

Short vs. Standard Laser-Microgrooved Implants Supporting Single and Splinted Crowns: A Prospective Study with 3 Years Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare survival rates, marginal bone loss (MBL), and peri-implant soft tissue parameters between short and standard laser-microgrooved implants supporting single or splinted crowns 3 years after loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 30 subjects received 1 short ( ≤ 7 mm ) and 1 standard length ( ≥ 9 mm ) laser-microgrooved implant in adjacent sites of the premolar and molar regions of the mandible or maxilla. Peri-implant soft tissue parameters and intraoral radiographs were recorded at the delivery of definitive crowns (baseline) and 3 years later. Cumulative survival rate (CSR) and marginal bone loss (MBL) in relation to crown/implant (C/I) ratio, implant length, location, type of antagonist, and type of prosthetic design (single or splinted), were evaluated. RESULTS: CSR of short implants was 98%, compared to 100% for standard implants, without significant statistical difference. MBL was not significantly different over the observation period, with an average of 0.23 ± 0.6 mm and 0.27 ± 0.3 mm for short and standard implants, respectively. No statistical differences were found between short and standard implants regarding plaque (14.7% vs. 15.7%), number of sites BOP (8.3% vs. 5.9%), probing depth (1.13 ± 0.6 mm vs. 1.04 ± 0.8 mm), and mean mucosal recession (0.18 ± 0.3 mm vs. 0.22 ± 0.3 mm). Analyzing MBL in relation to the C/I ratio, implant length, location, type of antagonist, and type of prosthetic design, no statistically significant differences were found. CONCLUSION: Regardless of C/I ratio, implant length, location, type of antagonist, and type of prosthetic design, short and standard laser-microgrooved implants had similar survival rates, MBL, and peri-implant soft tissue conditions over the observation period of 3 years.

Limited Evidence Suggests That, in a Deficient Edentulous Posterior Maxilla, Short Implants Could Be an Alternative to Sinus Augmentation With Longer Implants.

ARTICLE TITLE AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION: Short dental implants as compared to maxillary sinus augmentation procedure for the rehabilitation of edentulous posterior maxilla: Three-year results of a randomized clinical study. Taschieri S, Lolato A, Testori T, Francetti L, Del Fabbro M. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2018;20:9-20. SOURCE OF FUNDING: None. TYPE OF STUDY/DESIGN: RCT with a parallel group design.

Long-term follow-up of single crowns supported by short, moderately rough implants-A prospective 10-year cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate prospectively the clinical and radiographic outcomes after ten years of short (6 mm) implants with a moderately rough surface supporting single crowns in the posterior region. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty 6 mm modified sandblasted large-grit acid-etched (mod-SLA), soft tissue level implants were installed in the distal segments of 35 consecutive patients. After 6 weeks of healing, abutments were tightened, and single porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns were cemented. Implant survival, marginal bone loss, and clinical crown/implant ratio were evaluated at various time intervals up to 10 years after loading. RESULTS: Two out of the 40 implants were lost before loading, one implant was lost after 7 years because of peri-implantitis. One patient with two implants died and was excluded from analysis. Two patients did not come at the 10-year follow-up and were considered as drop out (2 implants). The survival rate was 91.7% (n = 36). Thirty-three implants were available for marginal bone loss evaluation. A mean marginal bone loss after 10 years of function was 0.8 ± 0.7 mm. Between 5 and 10 years, the loss was 0.2 ± 0.4 mm. No technical complications were registered during the 10-year period. The clinical crown/implant ratio increased with time from 1.6 at the delivery of the prosthesis to 2.0 after 10 years of loading with no increase between 5 and 10 years. CONCLUSION: Short (6 mm) implants with a moderately rough surface supporting single crowns in the posterior region and loaded after 6-7 weeks maintained full function for at least 10 years with low marginal bone resorption.