Literature DB >> 28081288

Short dental implants (6 mm) versus long dental implants (11-15 mm) in combination with sinus floor elevation procedures: 3-year results from a multicentre, randomized, controlled clinical trial.

Veronika Pohl1, Daniel S Thoma2, Katarzyna Sporniak-Tutak3, Abel Garcia-Garcia4, Thomas D Taylor5, Robert Haas1, Christoph H F Hämmerle2.   

Abstract

AIM: To test whether the use of short dental implants (6 mm) results in an implant survival rate similar to that with longer implants (11-15 mm) in combination with sinus grafting.
METHODS: This multicentre study enrolled 101 patients with partial edentulism in the posterior maxilla and a remaining bone height of 5-7 mm. Included patients were randomly assigned to receive short implants (6 mm; GS/group short) or long implants (11-15 mm) simultaneously with sinus grafting (GG/group graft). Six months after implant placement (IP), implants were loaded with single crowns (PR) and patients were re-examined yearly thereafter. Assessed outcomes included: implant survival, marginal bone level changes (MBL), probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BoP) and plaque accumulation (PCR) during 3 years of loading as well as recording of any adverse effects. In addition to descriptive statistics, statistical analysis has been performed for the two treatment modalities using a non-parametric approach.
RESULTS: In 101 patients, 137 implants were placed. At the 3-year follow-up (FU-3), 94 patients with 129 implants were re-examined. The implant survival rate was 100% in both groups. MBL at FU-3 was 0.45 mm (GG) and 0.44 mm (GS) (p > 0.05). A statistically significant loss of MBL was observed in both GG (-0.43 ± 0.58 mm) and GS (-0.44 ± 0.56 mm) from IP to FU-3, and from PR to FU-3 in GG (-0.25 ± 0.58 mm) but not in GS (-0.1 ± 0.54 mm). PCR and BoP at FU-3 did not show any difference between the groups but for PPD (p = 0.035).
CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, implants with a length of 6 mm as well as longer implants in combination with a lateral sinus lift may be considered as a treatment option provided a residual ridge height of 5-7 mm in the atrophied posterior maxilla is present.
© 2017 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  dental implant; multicentre; posterior maxilla; randomized controlled clinical trial; short dental implant; single unit; sinus floor elevation; sinus grafting

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28081288     DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.12694

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Periodontol        ISSN: 0303-6979            Impact factor:   8.728


  17 in total

1.  Impact of peri-implant bone resorption, prosthetic materials, and crown to implant ratio on the stress distribution of short implants: a finite element analysis.

Authors:  Pinar Ercal; Aysegul Erten Taysi; Demet Cagil Ayvalioglu; Meltem Mert Eren; Soner Sismanoglu
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 2.602

2.  Short versus standard implants at sinus augmented sites: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Manuel Toledano; Enrique Fernández-Romero; Cristina Vallecillo; Raquel Toledano; María T Osorio; Marta Vallecillo-Rivas
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2022-09-07       Impact factor: 3.606

Review 3.  Short Implants versus Longer Implants with Sinus Floor Elevation: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials with a Post-Loading Follow-Up Duration of 5 Years.

Authors:  Miaozhen Wang; Feng Liu; Christian Ulm; Huidan Shen; Xiaohui Rausch-Fan
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 3.748

4.  Long-Term Results after Placing Dental Implants in Patients with Papillon-Lefèvre Syndrome: Results 2.5-20 Years after Implant Insertion.

Authors:  Katrin Nickles; Mischa Krebs; Beate Schacher; Hari Petsos; Peter Eickholz
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 4.964

5.  A 1-7 year retrospective follow-up on consecutively placed 7-mm-long dental implants with an electrowetted surface.

Authors:  Paul S Rosen; Herman Sahlin; Rudolf Seemann; Ari S Rosen
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2018-08-23

6.  Radiographic Comparison of Bovine Bone Substitute Alone Versus Bovine Bone Substitute and Simvastatin for Human Maxillary Sinus Augmentation.

Authors:  Siamak Yaghobee; Amir Ali Reza Rasouli Ghahroudi; Afshin Khorsand; Sanaz Mahmoudi; Sahar Chokami Rafiei
Journal:  J Dent (Tehran)       Date:  2018-01

7.  The Placement of Four Short Implants and Full-Arch Early Loading in the Edentulous Patient Suffering from Severe Mandibular Alveolar Ridge Atrophy.

Authors:  Yuri Sedov; Oleg Mordanov; Sergei Grigoriev; Anatoly Avanesov; Kamil Khabiev
Journal:  Case Rep Dent       Date:  2019-10-22

Review 8.  Prosthodontic Principles in Dental Implantology: Adjustments in a Coronavirus Disease-19 Pandemic-Battered Economy.

Authors:  Ricardo A Boyce
Journal:  Dent Clin North Am       Date:  2020-11-06

9.  Single-crown restorations supported by short implants (6 mm) compared with standard-length implants (13 mm) in conjunction with maxillary sinus floor augmentation: a randomized, controlled clinical trial.

Authors:  Helle Baungaard Nielsen; Søren Schou; Niels Henrik Bruun; Thomas Starch-Jensen
Journal:  Int J Implant Dent       Date:  2021-07-16

Review 10.  Recent advances in dental implants.

Authors:  Do Gia Khang Hong; Ji-Hyeon Oh
Journal:  Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2017-11-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.