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

Antral membrane balloon technique versus Densah bur in crestal sinus lift with simultaneous implant placement: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

The posterior maxilla presents challenges for implant insertion because of the poor bone quality as well as the loss of vertical bone height. Indirect transcrestal sinus lift techniques are advised when a few millimeters of additional height are needed. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of antral membrane balloon technique versus Densah burs for transcrestal maxillary sinus lifting with simultaneous implant placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This randomized clinical trial was conducted on 22 patients received 32 dental implants for replacement of missed maxillary posterior teeth after crestal maxillary sinus lifting. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. Group 1, patients underwent crestal sinus floor elevation with simultaneous implant placement using antral membrane balloon technique. Group 2, patients underwent crestal sinus floor elevation with simultaneous implant placement using Densah burs. Patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) at regular time intervals immediately, 6 months and 12 months after surgery. All clinical and radiographic parameters were statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

All dental implants were successful for 12 months of follow up. Regarding implant primary stability, there was a statistical significant difference between the study groups in favor of Densah group (P = 0.004), while there was no significant difference after 6 months (P = 0.07). Radiographically, balloon group showed a statistically significant immediate postoperative vertical bone height (P < 0.0001), and significant reduction in vertical bone height after 6 months (P < 0.0001). Densah group showed significant increase in bone density (P ≤ 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Both techniques demonstrated successful clinical and radiographic outcomes for crestal sinus lift. The antral membrane balloon group demonstrated better immediate postoperative vertical bone gain, while Densah burs had higher implant primary stability and bone density.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered in Clinical-Trials.gov PRS ( https://register.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov ) under identification number NCT05922592 on 28/06/2023.

Prosthodontic criteria for maxillary immediate occlusal loading, surgical classifications of atrophic maxillae, and presentation of a new implant/anatomic classification system for immediate maxillary rehabilitation

PURPOSE

Immediate full-arch occlusal loading for patients with atrophic edentulous maxillae satisfies critical needs for this specific type of edentulous patient after placement of implants with high levels of primary implant stability. The needs include improved aesthetics, limited immediate improved function, and elimination of removable prostheses. Classification systems exist for edentulous maxillae but they do not include specifics regarding posterior implant placement. In conjunction with anterior implants, posterior implants improve Anterior/Posterior (A/P) spreads, decrease cantilevered segments (CLs), and likely will improve implant and prosthetic success rates. The purposes of this article include presenting a new classification system that outlines the different types of implants now available which will likely achieve the requisite primary stability for immediate fixed rehabilitation. This proposed classification system identifies a relationship between different implant options currently available and the remaining quantity of bone in the first and second maxillary molar zones.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The available literature regarding current classification systems was reviewed. The benefits and limitations of each system were described. The parameters associated with Immediate Occlusal Loading (IOL) for full arch maxillary prostheses include: posterior cantilever lengths of full arch fixed prostheses; existing A/P spread considerations for full arch prostheses; and introduction of a new classification system for atrophic posterior maxillary edentulous ridges were identified.

RESULTS

Currently, there are no available classification systems that outline specific implant options for posterior maxillae which will likely achieve the minimum primary stability needed for immediate rehabilitation. A new classification system was proposed where the rationale was to show clinicians that when a certain amount of bone remains in the posterior maxilla, there are specific implants designed to maximize primary stability. High implant primary stability is required for rehabilitation with immediate fixed implant-supported provisional prostheses. The proposed classification system assists clinicians in understanding what implant geometry is available and can be expected to achieve the requisite primary stability for immediate occlusal loading based on the available bone in the posterior maxillary molar zone.

CONCLUSIONS

This article reviewed current classification systems for edentulous maxillary patients, as well as clinical parameters required for full arch, immediate occlusal loading.  It also presented a new classification system to assist clinicians in selecting appropriate implants and surgical techniques for immediate fixed rehabilitation of patients with atrophic maxillae.

Outcome Difference between Short and Longer Dental Implants Placed Simultaneously with Alveolar Bone Augmentation: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives

This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to provide detailed insights into the clinical performance of short and longer dental implants placed simultaneously with bone augmentation.

Material and Methods

The search for literature was performed across MEDLINE (PubMed), ScienceDirect and the Cochrane Library databases, adhering to specific selection criteria and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Only articles published in English between 2014 and 2024 were considered for data collection. Primary outcomes were survival rate (SR), marginal bone loss (MBL) and complications. Clinical outcomes were as follows: bleeding on probing (BOP), periodontal pocket depth (PPD), and implant stability quotient (ISQ). Quality and risk of bias assessment were evaluated by the Critical Appraisal Checklist tool for randomized controlled trials developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute.

Results

A total of 14678 articles were screened, with 9 meeting the inclusion criteria and being utilized for this systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 495 patients with 984 implants (491 short and 493 longer implants) showing a SR of 93.91% for the short implants and 91.83% for the longer implants. Meta-analysis revealed statistically significant difference between short implants and longer implants simultaneously placed with alveolar bone augmentation in relation to MBL (-0.513 mm, 95% CI = -0.93 to -0.096; P = 0.02), and in PPD (-0.247, 95% CI = -0.515 to 0.022; P = 0.07).

Conclusions

When comparing the results of treatment with short and longer dental implants combined with alveolar bone augmentation, short implants showed better clinical results regarding the parameters of survival rate, marginal bone loss and complications.

Clinical evaluation of maxillary sinus floor elevation with or without bone grafts: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials with trial sequential analysis

Introduction

Our goal was to systematically review the current evidence comparing the relative effectiveness of two maxillary sinus floor elevation (MSFE) approaches (internal and external) without bone grafts with that of conventional/grafted MSFE in patients undergoing implantation in the posterior maxilla.

Material and methods

Medical databases (PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) were searched for randomised controlled trials published between January 1980 and May 2023. A manual search of implant-related journals was also performed. Studies published in English that reported the clinical outcomes of MSFE with or without bone material were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook Risk Assessment Tool. Meta-analyses and trial sequence analyses were performed on the included trials. Meta-regression analysis was performed using pre-selected covariates to account for substantial heterogeneity. The certainty of evidence for clinical outcomes was assessed using GRADEpro GDT online (Guideline Development Tool).

Results

Seventeen studies, including 547 sinuses and 696 implants, were pooled for the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference between MSFE without bone grafts and conventional MSFE in terms of the implant survival rate in the short term (n = 11, I2 = 0%, risk difference (RD): 0.03, 95% confidence intervals (CI): -0.01-0.07, p = 0.17, required information size (RIS) = 307). Although conventional MSFE had a higher endo-sinus bone gain (n = 13, I2 = 89%, weighted mean difference (WMD): -1.24, 95% CI: -1.91- -0.57, p = 0.0003, RIS = 461), this was not a determining factor in implant survival. No difference in perforation (n = 13, I2 = 0%, RD = 0.03, 95% CI: -0.02-0.09, p = 0.99, RIS = 223) and marginal bone loss (n = 4, I2 = 0%, WMD = 0.05, 95% CI: -0.14-0.23, p = 0.62, no RIS) was detected between the two groups using meta-analysis. The pooled results of the implant stability quotient between the two groups were not robust on sensitivity analysis. Because of the limited studies reporting on the visual analogue scale, surgical time, treatment costs, and bone density, qualitative analysis was conducted for these outcomes.

Conclusions

This systematic review revealed that both non-graft and grafted MSFE had high implant survival rates. Owing to the moderate strength of the evidence and short-term follow-up, the results should be interpreted with caution.

Comparing short implants to standard dental implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with extended follow-up

PURPOSE

To compare the difference of marginal level changes (MBL), implant failure (IF), biological and prosthetic complications (BC and PC), and prosthetic failure (PF) of short implants (SH) and standard implants (ST).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic searches (PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov) and manual searches were performed to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating SH to ST. Applying Stata, a meta-analysis was conducted on the weighted mean difference (WMD) and standardized mean difference (SMD) of MBL and the risk difference (RD) of the secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Twenty-four articles were involved in the present study. There were statistically significant differences in MBLs, preferring short implants in the maxilla (WMD: -0.147 (CI: -0.224, -0.070), I2: 76.6%; SMD: -0.757 (CI: -1.226, -0.289), I2: 89.2%) and in the mandible (WMD: -0.377 (CI: -0.656, -0.098), I2: 85.8%; SMD: -0.811 (CI: -1.418, -0.204), I2: 78.8%). There were no significant differences in IF (RD: 0.011 (-0.002, 0.023), I2: 0.0%), PF (RD:0.003 (-0.007, 0.014), I2: 0.0%), and PC (RD:0.001 (-0.008, 0.010), I2: 0.0%). There were significantly higher biological complications (RD: -0.071 (-0.106, -0.036), I2: 0.82.9%) for ST compared to SH in both jaws up to a 10-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

SH and ST had comparable overall outcomes, but short implants had less marginal bone loss and lower biological complications. However, more research is needed to confirm these findings.

Evaluation of crestal sinus floor elevation in cases exhibiting an oblique sinus floor with a residual bone height of 4.0-7.0 mm using Densah burs with simultaneous implant placement: a prospective clinical study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness of using Densah burs for lifting the maxillary sinus membrane in cases with an oblique sinus floor with a residual bone height of 4-7 mm.

METHODS

The study was conducted on 16 patients, comprising 9 males and 7 females, aged 25-60 years, split into two groups of 8 each: group I with a residual bone height of 4-5.5 mm below the sinus floor and group II with a residual bone height of 5.5-7 mm. Exclusion criteria included smokers, presence of systemic or metabolic conditions that contraindicate implant placement and a local sinus pathology. The study involved the use of Densah burs, using the osseodensification concept to elevate the sinus floor, along with simultaneous dental implant placement. The integrity of the sinus membrane was verified via clinical examination and a confirmatory cone beam computed tomography scan.

RESULTS

The study revealed that out of the 16 cases, one case had a sinus membrane perforation, confirmed clinically at the time of the operation. The study achieved a mean lift of 4.42 mm and a mean final seating torque of 35.5 N/cm. At the 1-year follow-up, all cases showed clinical success, with no signs of sinus pathology or complications.

CONCLUSIONS

In cases with oblique sinus floors and a residual bone height of 4-7 mm in moderately atrophic posterior maxilla, the osseodensification concept proved to be a safe and effective method for performing sinus lift procedures with simultaneous implantation.

Treatment alternatives for the rehabilitation of the posterior edentulous maxilla

Rehabilitation of the edentulous maxilla with implant-supported fixed dental prostheses can represent a significant clinical challenge due to limited bone availability and surgical access, among other factors. This review addresses several treatment options to replace missing teeth in posterior maxillary segments, namely the placement of standard implants in conjunction with maxillary sinus floor augmentation, short implants, tilted implants, and distal cantilever extensions. Pertinent technical information and a concise summary of relevant evidence on the reported outcomes of these different therapeutic approaches are presented, along with a set of clinical guidelines to facilitate decision-making processes and optimize the outcomes of therapy.

Pterygoid and tuberosity implants in the atrophic posterior maxilla: A retrospective cohort study

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Rehabilitation of the partially or completely edentulous posterior maxilla using dental implants is a clinical challenge because of the presence of the maxillary sinus, as well as the low quality and quantity of bone in that region. In addition to bone augmentation procedures, posterior maxillary rehabilitation using implants includes their anchoring in bones such as the zygoma, pterygoid, and maxillary tuberosity, as well as in short implants. However, the performance of pterygoid and tuberosity implants in the atrophic posterior maxilla is unclear.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate the survival of tuberosity and pterygoid implants in patients with posterior maxillary atrophy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A nonprobability convenient sample of patients who had received fixed prostheses on implants placed in the maxillary tuberosity or pterygoid regions was analyzed retrospectively. Demographic variables included sex (male, female) and age. Implant-related variables included surface characteristics, site of placement, implant design, length, diameter, and anteroposterior insertion angle. Prosthetic-related variables included the type of reconstruction for rehabilitation and loading protocols. Implant survival, complications, crestal bone loss, and follow-up intervals were also documented. Collected data were analyzed at both patient and implant levels. The demographics and implant characteristics of patients receiving pterygoid or tuberosity implants were analyzed with a statistical software program (α=.05). Survival analysis was estimated by using the nonparametric Kaplan-Meier curve.

RESULTS

A total of 119 patients had 183 pterygoid or tuberosity implants inserted. Most implants in the pterygoid region (71.5%) were Ø4.1 mm (87.4%) and 15 mm in length (60.1%). The most common prostheses were complete maxillary reconstructions (49.2%) with late loading (74.3%). The average implant anteroposterior insertion angle was 60.8 degrees. The cumulative survival rate was 97.3% (n=178) during the mean follow-up period of 57 months (range 1 to 168 months). Among all implants placed, 2.7% failed (n=5) within 2 months of their placement. The statistically significant differences noted between tuberosity and pterygoid implants were related to design, surface characteristics, and loading. The average crestal bone loss was 1.5 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

The survival of the implants placed in the maxillary tuberosity and pterygoid regions was high in patients with posterior maxillary atrophy.

Clinical Evaluation of Short (6 mm) and Longer Implants Placed Side by Side in Posterior Partially Edentulous Area: A 3-Year Observational Study

Background

Short implants have been proposed as an alternative solution for the rehabilitation of atrophic posterior region.

Purpose

To compare the clinical outcomes between 6 mm short implants and conventional implants placed under similar conditions of bone quality and occlusal loading.

Materials and Methods

Nine patients received atone 6 mm implant and one standard-length (8 mm length or longer) implants in a total of 10 partially edentulous areas. Implants were left submerged for 3-6 months healing period and the screw-retained splinted prostheses were delivered. When the provisional or final restoration was placed, and at each year after loading, standardized intraoral radiograph was taken for themarginal bone level (MBL) changes around the implants. Subsequently, the patients were recalled for the clinical examination evaluating the implant survival, sulcus bleeding index, suppuration, and the incidence of prosthetic complications at every 6 months after the definitive crown delivery. The observation period was continued to 3 years (mean follow-up was 3.4 ± 0.3 years) after functional loading.

Results

Nine patients (10 short implants and 10 standard length implants) were selected in this study. Cumulative survival rates of the short implants and standard-length implants were 100% in both groups, and no biological and prosthetic complication were found in 3 years observation period. Cortical bone thickness of implant insertion sites was 1.39 ± 0.45 mm at short implants and 1.38 ± 0.69 mm at standard-length implants, and trabecular bone computed tomography values of implant insertion sites was 424.1 ± 290.1 at short implants and 410.9 ± 267.9 at standard-length implants. The MBL changes were -0.30 ± 0.71 mm at short implants and -0.19 ± 0.78 mm at standard-length implants at 3 years follow-up visit. No significant difference was found in the average of MBL changes between implant length.

Conclusions

Within the limits of this study, it can be concluded that 6 mm short implants in a posterior edentulous region showed excellent results compared with conventional implants.

Dynamic navigation for zygomatic implant placement: A randomized clinical study comparing the flapless versus the conventional approach

OBJECTIVES

The assessment of the accuracy of flapless placement of zygomatic implants in edentulous maxilla using dynamic navigation.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was carried out on 20 patients. Patients were randomized into two groups, the flapless (Group 1; n=10) and the conventional (Group 2; n=10). In each case two zygomatic implants were inserted under local anaesthesia, one on the right and one on the left side guided by a dynamic navigation system. The surgical procedure was identical in the two groups except for the reflection of the mucoperiosteal flap which was eliminated in the flapless cases. Postoperative CBCT scans were used to assess the accuracy of the placement of zygomatic implants.

RESULTS

Osseointegration was achieved for all the implants, except one case in the flapless group. Statistically significant differences in the accuracy of the position of the zygomatic implants was found between the flapless and the conventional groups, measured at the apex and the entry points of the implants (p < 0.01). The average apical and coronal deviations were 5 mm and 3 mm, respectively; the angular deviation was 6°, and 2 mm vertical apical disparity was detected between the planned and the achieved surgical position. Perforation of the Schneiderian membrane was noted in three cases, one in flapless group and two in the conventional group.

CONCLUSIONS

Flapless placement of zygomatic implants guided by dynamic navigation offered satisfactory safety and accuracy.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This is the first clinical trial to prove the feasibility and accuracy of flapless placement of zygomatic implant with minimal morbidity. The study highlights the innovative reflection of the Schneiderian membrane under guided surgical navigation. The procedure can be performed under local anaesthesia, which offers clinical advantages. Adequate training on the use of dynamic navigation is mandatory before its use in clinical cases.

Radiographic comparison between Densah burs and osteotome for graftless internal sinus lifting with simultaneous implant placement: a randomized clinical trial

Implant placement in the posterior maxilla is not an easy procedure, not only due to the low quality of bone, but also the physiological pneumatization, which decreases the remaining bone height to the maxillary sinus. Sinus lifting is an alternative for implant placement in these cases. The aim of this study was to radiographically compare the effect of Densah densifying burs versus osteotome in transcrestal sinus lifting. Twelve patients with missing premolars or molars and limited residual bone height were enrolled in the study and divided equally (by coin toss) into two groups: group A underwent densifying bur sinus lifting and group B underwent osteotome sinus lifting. Follow-up was performed over 6 months. Bone density (measured around the implant and at the implant apex) and bone height gain (measured using three reference points across the implant length) were measured using OnDemand 3D software. Bone density around the implant was found to be significantly higher for the densifying burs (P = 0.010); however, no significant difference in bone height gain (P = 0.985) or apical bone density (P = 0.337) was detected between the two groups. Densifying burs significantly improved bone density around dental implants, but did not prove to provide a significantly higher bone height gain or apical density compared to osteotomes in graftless internal sinus lifting. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinical trial.gov registration ID #NCT04688957.

Complications of sinus floor elevation procedure and management strategies: A systematic review

AIM

This systematic review aimed to investigates the types and incidences of complications following sinus floor elevations (SFE) along with their prevention and management strategies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic database and hand search were conducted to screen the literature published from January 1960 to June 2021. The selected studies had to report well-described SFE techniques, complications during, and post-SFE. Data extraction included types of SFE techniques, complications, and their treatment strategies.

RESULTS

A total of 74 studies with 4411 SFE procedures met the inclusion criteria. Different SFE techniques demonstrated varying patterns for both complications and complication rates. Postoperative pain, swelling, and edema were widely reported. The most common complications that required intervention following Lateral SFE (LSFE) were sinus membrane perforation (SMP), wound dehiscence, graft exposure and failure, and sinusitis. LSFE had more SMPs and sinusitis cases compared with a transcrestal SFE (TSFE). The presence of benign paroxysmal positional vertigo following TSFE was significant in certain selected studies.

CONCLUSION

Given the inherent limitations, this systematic review showed distinct features of complications in SFE using varying techniques. Treatment planning for these procedures should incorporate strategies to avoid complication occurrence.

The use of corticosteroids in the lateral sinus augmentation surgical procedure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The lateral maxillary sinus augmentation (MSA) procedure has good predictability in terms of the success of bone regeneration with a low incidence of postoperative infections, estimated between 2% and 5.6%. Although the use of antibiotics is an established and standardized prophylactic measure for MSA procedures, the addition of corticosteroids still varies among clinician preference and clinical judgment.

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review was to identify whether the administration of corticosteroids during the MSA surgical procedure affects postoperative symptoms including swelling, pain, and infection rate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search through PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, and Web of Science indices, according to PICO criteria, was conducted to identify whether MSA peri-operative use of corticosteroids reduces the incidence of complications and patient morbidity. A single arm meta-analysis was performed due to the lack of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing groups treated with or without peri-operative corticosteroids. The intracluster correlation co-efficient (ICC) and design effect were calculated to adjust for the clustering design.

RESULTS

In the 37 studies included, a total of 1599 patients (378 Cort, 1221 No-Cort) were analyzed. Before and after taking account of clustering, there was statistically significant effect of corticosteroids on swelling, pain, wound dehiscence, trismus, and hematoma. The complication rates postoperatively were comparable between the two study groups, however slight differences existed in the incidence of active suppuration (1.7% [95% CI 0.7-3.9] Cort vs. 3.2% [2.2-4.5] No-Cort), wound dehiscence (3.9% [1.3-11.2] Cort vs. 2.1% [1.0-4.1] No-Cort) and trismus (2.7% [0.8-8.4] Cort vs. 1.4% [0.8-2.5] No-Cort).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the event rate of the 1-to-2-week postoperative complications did not differ between the two groups, the lack of conclusive data and research comparing peri-operative corticosteroid use makes it impossible to draw definitive conclusions and more evidence and studies designed for this specific purpose are needed.

One-stage versus two-stage technique using two splinted extra-short implants: A multicentric split-mouth study with a one-year follow-up

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical outcomes of extra-short implants (≤6.5 mm) inserted with one-stage versus two-stage technique in adjacent sites of the upper or lower jaw.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this split-mouth multicenter study, implants were randomly divided into two groups according to the healing phase: two-stage and one-stage technique. Primary outcome measures were implant survival, implant success, and prosthodontic complications. Secondary outcome measurements were: implant stability quotient (ISQ) collected at surgery time (T0), and after 3 (T3) and 12 (T12) months, marginal bone level (MBL) evaluated at T0, T3, T6, and T12, marginal bone loss evaluated at T6 and T12, plaque index (PI), probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BoP) evaluated at T3, T6, and T12. Significances of differences between groups were tested by linear mixed model with random intercept.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients (8 males and 11 females) were included. A total of 38 implants were inserted. At T12 implant cumulative survival and implant success rate were 100% in both groups. No statistically significant differences were recorded for any of the analyzed parameters between the two groups at any time point. ISQ values were similar at T0 (two-stage: mean 67.53 ± SD 19.47; one-stage: mean 66.53 ± 19.07 p = 0.8738) and increased in both groups at the 12-month follow-up appointment (two-stage: 81.1 ± 7.04; one-stage: 81.39 ± 0.9266). MBL values were similar in the two groups at any time point. At T12 marginal bone loss was 0.46 ± 0.41 (two-stage) and 0.45 ± 0.38 (one-stage) mm (p = 0.9417), while mean PD was 2.7 ± 0.85 (two-stage) and 2.69 ± 0.89 (one-stage) mm.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of the present short-term report, extra-short implants demonstrated optimal clinical outcomes using the one-stage technique, without statistically significant differences compared with the traditional two-stage approach.

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

BACKGROUND

Short implants are proposed as a less invasive alternative with fewer complications than standard implants in combination with sinus lift. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to state the efficacy of placing short implants (≤ 6 mm) compared to standard-length implants (≥ 8 mm) performing sinus lift techniques in patients with edentulous posterior atrophic jaws. Efficacy will be evaluated through analyzing implant survival (IS) and maintenance of peri-implant bone (MBL).

METHODS

Screening process was done using the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE by PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Oral Health, and Web of Science (WOS). The articles included were randomized controlled trials. Risk of bias was evaluated according to The Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Weighted means were calculated. Heterogeneity was determined using Higgins (I²). A random-effects model was applied. Secondary outcomes such as surgical time, patient satisfaction, mucositis and peri-implantitis, pain, and swelling were analyzed.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies (597 patients and 901 implants) were evaluated. IS was 1.02 risk ratio, ranging from 1.00 to 1.05 (CI 95%) (p = 0.09), suggesting that IS was similar when both techniques were used. MBL was higher in patients with standard-length implants plus sinus lift elevation (p = 0.03). MBL was 0.11 (0.01-0.20) mm (p = 0.03) and 0.23 (0.07-0.39) mm (p = 0.005) before and after 1 year of follow-up, respectively, indicating that the marginal bone loss is greater for standard-length implants.

DISCUSSION

Within the limitations of the present study, as relatively small sample size, short dental implants can be used as an alternative to standard-length implants plus sinus elevation in cases of atrophic posterior maxilla. Higher MBL was observed in the groups where standard-length implants were used, but implant survival was similar in both groups. Moreover, with short implants, it was observed a reduced postoperative discomfort, minimal invasiveness, shorter treatment time, and reduced costs.

CLINICAL CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The low MBL promoted by short implants does contribute to a paradigm shift from sinus grafting with long implants to short implants. Further high-quality long-term studies are required to confirm these findings.

Evaluation of Mucous Retention Cyst Prevalence on Digital Panoramic Radiographs in the Local Population of Iran

Introduction. Inflammatory diseases and cysts such as mucous retention cysts (MRCs) and benign tumors include a large proportion of lesions of the mouth, teeth, and jaw. The most common complication of this lesion is sinusitis. Due to the high frequency of these cysts in panoramic radiography of patients referred to dentistry, this study aimed to evaluate the frequency of mucous retention cysts in the maxillary sinus on panoramic images of the local population in Birjand in the year 2020. Methods. In this descriptive research design study, 1624 digital panoramic radiographs of patients referred to the oral and maxillofacial radiology department of Birjand Dental School were selected randomly. Cases were evaluated in terms of MRC appearance by two oral and maxillofacial radiology specialists. Then, based on sex, location, and size of the cysts, the images were assessed. In the predesigned checklists, data were recorded. The MRC diagnosis was confirmed by observation of a dome-shaped radiopaque view on the floor or sinus walls with a smooth surface with no cortical margin. MRCs were categorized into one of three groups by size: 1- less than 10 mm, 2- between 10 and 20 mm, and 3- more than 20 mm. Bilateral or unilateral involvement of lesions was noted. Seasons of the year ( $P<0.05$ ). There was no significant relationship between the month of the year and the prevalence of cysts ( $P>0.05$ ). Results. MRCs were detected in 80 panoramic images of 1624 (9/4), of which 54 patients (67.5%) were male and 26 patients (32.5%) were female. Of those 34 (42.5%), the total cases were between 30 and 40 years old. Most cysts (58.8%) were in the right sinus, and their size was 10–20 mm mainly (43.4%). Based on the results, there was a significant relationship between the prevalence of MRCs with age and sex. Conclusions. Panoramic images are so helpful in MRC detection. In this study, the frequency of MRCs is the highest in males between 30 and 40 years old. These lesions are reported mainly as unilateral and solitary in spring.

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

This study compared the outcome of fixed prostheses supported by short implants (<8 mm) and longer implants (≥8 mm) with an elevated sinus floor after 5 years of follow-up. The literature searches were performed electronically and manually in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases to identify relevant articles published from 1 January 2013 to 31 January 2020. We selected eligible studies using inclusion criteria and assessed their quality. From 1688 identified studies, five randomized controlled trials were included. Between the short implant group and the control group, the implant failure-related pooled risk ratio (RR) was 3.64 (p = 0.07). The RR for technical complications was 2.61 (p = 0.0002), favoring longer implants. Marginal peri-implant bone loss after 1 and 5 years of function showed statistically significant less bone loss at short implants (1 year: mean difference = 0.21 mm; p < 0.00001; 5 years: mean difference = 0.26 mm; p = 0.02). The implant failure and the biological failure of both groups were similar after 5 years of follow-up. Short implants could be an alternative to long implants with an elevated sinus floor for atrophic maxillae in aging populations. Studies with larger trials and longer periods of follow-up (10 years) remain essential.

Histomorphometric evaluation of different graft associations for maxillary sinus elevation in wide antral cavities: a randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

Pneumatization of the maxillary sinus can make it difficult, if not impossible, to install osseointegrated implants, and undertake their eventual functional rehabilitation, which may ultimately require regenerative techniques to achieve. This randomized controlled study proposed conducting a histological evaluation of the behavior of different graft materials in wide maxillary sinuses, at a height of 8 to 10 mm from the alveolar ridge, combined with bone remnants less than 3mm.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-six patients underwent a sinus elevation procedure through the lateral window. The sinuses were randomly filled with the following materials (n=12/group): group 1, xenogenic bone + autogenous bone (ratio 70:30, respectively); group 2, xenogenic bone + L-PRF; and group 3, xenogenic bone. At 8 months, bone biopsies of engrafted sites were harvested and analyzed histomorphometrically in order to quantify newly formed bone tissue.

RESULTS

The results showed a greater area of newly formed bone for G1, averaging 2678.37 (1116.40) μm², compared with G2 at 984.87 (784.27) μm², and G3 at 480.66 (384.76) μm² (p < 0.05). Additionally, fewer xenogenic bone particles and a large amount of connective tissue were observed in G2.

CONCLUSIONS

In maxillary sinuses with large antral cavities, autogenous bone combined with xenogenic bone seems to demonstrate better graft remodeling and improve bone formation, compared with the addition of L-PRF.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

L-PRF produces few advantages regarding new bone formation in the wide maxillary sinuses.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (REBEC) number RBR-2pbbrvg.

A 5-year randomized controlled clinical trial comparing 4-mm ultrashort to longer implants placed in regenerated bone in the posterior atrophic jaw

BACKGROUND

Short implants (up to 5-mm long) have shown good results when compared to longer implants placed in augmented bone.

PURPOSE

To evaluate if 4-mm ultrashort implants could also be an alternative to bone augmentation in the severely atrophic posterior jaws. The primary aim of the study was to compare implant survival rates between study groups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty partially edentulous patients with posterior atrophic jaws (5-6 mm of bone above the mandibular canal and 4-5 mm below the maxillary sinus) were included: 40 patients in the maxilla and 40 in mandible. The patients were randomized to receive one to three 4-mm ultrashort implants or one to three implants at least 10-mm long in augmented bone. Results are reported 5 years after loading with the following outcome measures: implant and prosthetic failures, complications and peri-implant marginal bone level changes.

RESULTS

Thirty-two complications were reported for the control group in 18 patients versus 13 complications in 10 patients in the test group, the difference being not statistically significant (p = 0.103). In the augmented group, 12 implants failed in 6 patients versus 7 short implants in 6 cases, and 9 prostheses failed in the control group while 4 in the test one, without statistically significant differences (p = 1.000 and 0.363, respectively). At 5 years after loading, short implants lost on average 0.58 ± 0.40 mm of peri-implant marginal bone and long implants 0.99 ± 0.58 mm, the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Four-millimeter ultrashort implants showed similar if not better results when compared to longer implants placed in augmented jaws 5 years after loading. For this reason, their use could be in specific cases preferable to bone augmentation since the treatment is less invasive, faster, cheaper and associated with less morbidity. However, longer follow-ups and larger trials are needed.

Are mucous retention cysts and pseudocysts in the maxillary sinus a risk factor for dental implants? A systematic review

Background

Mucous retention cysts and pseudocysts of the maxillary sinus are benign lesions present in up to 13% of adult patients. Different surgical approaches for sinus lift and dental implant placement in the presence of these lesions have been proposed.

Material and Methods

A systematic review was performed following the PRISMA statement recommendations to answer the PICO question: Does the aspiration or removal of mucous retention cysts/pseudocysts before or during sinus lifting and dental implant placing, affect the survival of the implants? The study was pre-registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020185528). Included articles quality was assessed using the “NIH quality assessment tool” and “The Newcastle-Ottawa scale”.

Results

Previous literature in this field is scarce and with a low level of evidence. There are no randomized prospective studies. Only 19 studies were identified, being composed of 2 cohort studies and 17 case series/reports. These studies involved 182 patients with a previous history of mucous retention cyst or pseudocyst in 195 maxillary sinuses where 233 implants were placed. The mean age of the patients was 45.5 (range: 12-80 years); 122 (67%) were male patients and 60 (33%) were female patients. The mean follow-up of the patients was 17.6 (range: 4-90 months). Only two fail was reported. No differences were identified in relation to the surgical approach or in relation to the removal/aspiration of the sinus lesion (prior to or simultaneous to sinus grafting) or not.

Conclusions

The level of evidence was grade 4 according to the CEBM and further studies are needed to confirm this observations, but with the available data, dental implants placement after sinus lift procedure in patients with mucous retention cysts and pseudocysts seems to be safe and present high survival regardless on the removal of the lesion or not.

Key words:Dental implants, maxillary sinus, sinus lift, mucous retention cyst, pseudocyst.

Long-Term Comparison of Survival and Marginal Bone of Implants with and without Sinus Augmentation in Maxillary Molars within the Same Patients: A 5.8- to 22-Year Retrospective Study

Maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) is widely used and considered a predictable procedure for implant placement. However, the influence of MSFA on implant survival and marginal bone loss (MBL) is still inconclusive. The purpose of this retrospective observational study is to evaluate the long-term genuine influence of MSFA on the survival and MBL of implants by comparing those with and without MSFA only in maxillary molars within the same patients. Thirty-eight patients (28 male and 10 female), with a total of 119 implants, received implants with and without MSFA, and were followed up for 5.8 to 22 years. Patient- and implant-related factors were assessed with a frailty model for implant survival and with generalized estimation equations (GEE) for MBL around the implant. No variables showed a statistical significance for implant failure in the frailty model. In GEE analysis for MBL, MSFA did not show any statistical significance. In conclusion, MSFA demonstrated no significant influence on implant failure and MBL in posterior maxilla in this study.

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.

Sinus Floor Elevation via an Osteotome Technique without Biomaterials

According to classic Hirschfeld studies, the first teeth to be lost are the first and second maxillary molars. After the teeth are extracted and the alveolar process is developed, the maxillary sinus is reabsorbed and pneumatized with a decrease in bone availability in the posterior sector of the maxilla. This process often creates the need to perform regeneration techniques for the placement of implants in this area due to the low availability of bone. The most frequently used and documented technique for the elevation of the sinus maxillary floor is elevation by the side window, as proposed by Tatum. In 1994, Summers proposed a technique that allowed the elevation of the sinus floor from a crestal access using an instrument called an osteotome, as well as the placement of the implant in the same surgical act. The aimed of the study was to evaluate the survival of 32 implants placed in posterior maxilla with bone availability less than 5 mm performing a sinus lift augmentation technique with osteotome without biomaterials. The results of this study show a survival rate of 100% for 32 implants placed in situations with an initial bone availability of 2 to 5 mm without the use of graft material. The infra-drilling technique used offers an increase in the primary stability of implants that allows adequate osteointegration Implants placed were charged at 12 weeks. In all cases, spontaneous bone formation was observed, even in cases where a positive Valsalva maneuver was observed. This proposed technique reduces treatment time and the need for more invasive maxillary sinus augmentation techniques.

The rehabilitation of posterior atrophic maxilla by using the graftless option of short implant versus conventional long implant with sinus graft: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trial

Aim

The purpose of systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy of short implant versus conventional long implant with sinus graft in patients rehabilitated for posterior atrophic maxilla.

Setting and Design

Systematic review and meta analysis.

Materials and Methods

Electronic searches were conducted in Pub Med, Embase, and Medline with supplemented by manual search up to December 2019. The randomized controlled trial (RCTs) comparing short implant (<8.5 mm) and long implant (>8.5 mm) with sinus graft were included. (Prospero CRD42020186972).

Statistical Analysis Used

Random-effect model, fixed-effect model, A funnel plot and the Egger's test.

Results

Twenty-two Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were assessed with 667 patients and 1595 implants (short implant:767, Long implant:835). No significant difference of implant survival rate was recorded for short and long implant (at patient level: RR: 1.01, 95% CI = 0.52-2.0, P = 0.87, I2 = 0%, at implant level RR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.6-2.0, P = 0.7, I2 = 0%). Similarly marginal bone resorption was reported no difference for short and long implant (MD = 0.16. 95% CI: -0.23 = -0.08, P = 0.00, I2 = 74.83%). Biological complications were marginally higher for long implant (RR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.23-0.8, P = 0.13, I2 = 29.11%). and prosthetic complications were marginally higher for short implants (RR=1.56, 95% CI=0.85-3.15, P = 0.43, I2 = 0%).

Conclusion

There was no significance difference in implant survival rate and marginal bone resorption recorded for both the short implant and long implant with sinus graft, in the patients rehabilitated with posterior atrophic maxilla. Hence, short implant is a suitable alternative to long implant with sinus graft, for the rehabilitation posterior atrophic maxilla.

Comparative Analysis of Peri-Implant Bone Loss in Extra-Short, Short, and Conventional Implants. A 3-Year Retrospective Study

Objective: To evaluate the influence of implant length on marginal bone loss, comparing implants of 4 mm, 6 mm, and >8 mm, supporting two splinted crowns after 36-month functional loading. Materials and Methods: this retrospective clinical trial evaluated the peri-implant behavior of splinted crowns (two per case) on pairs of implants of the same length placed in the posterior maxilla (molar area). Implants were divided into three groups according to length (Group 1: extra-short 4 mm; Group 2: short 6 mm; Group 3: conventional length >8 mm). Marginal bone loss was analyzed using standardized periapical radiographs at the time of loading and 36 months later. Results: 24 patients (19 women and 5 men) were divided into three groups, eight rehabilitations per group, in the position of the maxillary first and second molars. The 48 Straumann^® Standard Plus (Regular Neck (RN)/Wide Neck (WN)) implants were examined after 36 months of functional loading. Statistical analysis found no significant differences in bone loss between the three groups (p = 0.421). No implant suffered biological complications or implant loss. Long implants were associated with less radiographic bone loss. Conclusions: extra-short (4 mm); short (6 mm); and conventional length (>8 mm) implants in the posterior maxilla present similar peri-implant bone loss and 100% survival rates in rehabilitation, by means of two splinted crowns after 36 months of functional loading. Implants placed in posterior positions present better bone loss results than implants placed in anterior positions, regardless of the interproximal area where bone loss is measured. Conventional length (>8 mm) implants show better behavior in terms of distal bone loss than short (6 mm) and extra-short (4 mm) implants.

Comparative Clinical Study Using Short and Conventional Implants in Bilateral Jaw Posteriors

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.

Short implants (<8mm) versus longer implants (≥8mm) with lateral sinus floor augmentation in posterior atrophic maxilla: A meta-analysis of RCT`s in humans

BACKGROUND

One of the greatest challenges that dentists face today is to rehabilitate severe atrophied alveolar ridges in partially and completely edentulous patients with implants. Despite the high survival rate of implants placed next to sinus elevation, this technique presents complications that can be avoided by placing short implants, an option that also presents high survival rates. For this reason, the aim of this study is to compare the survival rate, marginal bone loss and complications associated with short implants (<8 mm) versus longer implants (≥8mm) placed with lateral sinus floor elevation in posterior atrophic maxillae.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A literature search was conducted by two independent reviewers in the PubMed/Medline (National Library of Medicine, Washington, DC) electronic database for articles published from January 2007 to July 2018. Seven qualified articles were selected for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The test for overall effect did not find statistical significance in the survival rates, overall complications, intra-operative complications, post-operative complications and prosthetic complications. However, the test showed statistically significant differences in biological complications in favor of standard implants, and marginal bone loss between control and test groups in favor of short implants (<8mm) was found.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limitations of the present study, prosthetic rehabilitations with short implants (<8mm) in posterior maxilla is a reliable treatment option as an alternative to lateral wall sinus floor augmentation.

Influence of crown-to-implant ratio and different prosthetic designs on the clinical conditions of short implants in posterior regions: A 4-year retrospective clinical and radiographic study

BACKGROUND

Short implants (intra-bony length ≤ 8 mm) are generally considered as an alternative to bone augmentation in challenging situations; however, clinical evidence from large-scale studies with long follow-up regarding the application of short implants remains deficient.

PURPOSE

The present study aimed to assess the mid-term clinical outcomes of short implants supporting fixed prostheses in the posterior region, and to investigate the effects of the crown-to-implant ratio (C/I), and other patient-, implant-, prosthesis-relevant factors on the clinical conditions around short implants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

180 Thommen short implants in 130 partially edentulous patients were enrolled in the study after 3 to 7 (mean 4.2) years of follow-up. Potential risk factors (patient sex and age, implant diameter and location, splinted vs single-tooth restorations, retention mode, anatomical and clinical C/I ratios) were evaluated according to the following outcomes: Implant survival, marginal bone loss (MBL), and mechanical and biological complications.

RESULTS

In total, four implants in four patients failed as a result of peri-implantitis. The cumulative survival rate was 97.8% for implant-based analysis. The peri-implant MBL around 180 short implants was 0.90 ± 0.78 mm. The mean clinical C/I ratio was 1.16 ± 0.36. Correlation analysis revealed that the influence of the clinical C/I ratio and patient age were significant for MBL (P < .05), whereas other potential risk factors showed no significant association with the outcome. Among 180 short implants, 24 cases (13.3%) had biological complications and 32 cases (17.8%) had mechanical complications, respectively. Peri-implant MBL and complication rates around splinted and non-splinted implants were not statistically different.

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of this study, short implants supporting fixed prostheses in the posterior region achieved predictable clinical outcomes over a 3 to 7 year period. Within the range of 0.47 to 3.01, the higher the C/I ratio, the less the peri-implant MBL.

Retrospective clinical analysis of risk factors associated with failed short implants

BACKGROUND

With advanced technology, short implants are more commonly used and have proven to have a relatively reliable curable efficacy. A consensus has not been reached regarding potential risk factors related to the loss of short implants.

PURPOSE

This large-sample retrospective study concentrated not only on patient characteristics and medical procedures but also on the features of implants in order to uncover the risk factors associated with short implants.

METHODS

Between 2014 and 2017, a total of 7001 implants were inserted at Nanjing Stomatological Hospital, Medical School of Nanjing University. Among the all, 1236 short implants were included after being evaluated according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. In organizing the detailed information, seven variables including bone grafting procedure, age, gender, diameter of the implant, implant position, surface treatment, and definitive restorations were taken into consideration. The χ² test, Kaplan-Meier test, logistic regression, and multifactorial Cox regression analysis were employed to explore the risk factors.

RESULTS

The cumulative survival rate of short implants was 96.36%, slightly lower than that of the standard implants (98.16%, P < .001). Most of the short implants (84.44%) were lost at the early stage, mainly because of infection. Based on the results, male gender, implants treated by titanium anodizing and single-crown restoration increased the loss rate of short implants. Comparison of the short implants inserted into the maxillary and mandibular posterior area alone showed that the maxillary molar area was a risk factor for prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Male gender, TA surface treatment, and the presence of a single crown were associated with an increasing rate of short implants loss. Examination of the implant location focused on the posterior area revealed the maxillary posterior area to be a risk factor.

Short implants (5-8 mm) vs long implants (≥10 mm) with augmentation in atrophic posterior jaws: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

The aim of this systematic review was to compare the survival rate, marginal bone loss changes and complications between short implants (5-8 mm) and long implants (≥10 mm) with a bone-augmented procedure in the posterior jaw. An electronic search of the MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane Library databases through September 2018 was done to identify randomised controlled trials (RCT) assessing short implants and long implants with at least a 1-year follow-up period after loading. A quantitative meta-analysis was conducted on the survival rate, marginal bone loss changes and complications. Ten RCTs met the inclusion criteria. There were no significant differences in the survival rate (RR: 1.01; 95% CI: [0.99, 1.03]; P = .32) and complications (RR: 0.48; 95% CI: [0.20, 1.17]; P = .11) between the two groups. Compared with the long implant group, the short implant group had a lower marginal bone loss change, and the effect measure was significant (mean difference: -0.13; 95% CI: [-0.20, -0.06]; P < .05). This systematic review showed no difference between the survival rates and complications of short implants (5-8 mm) and long implants (≥10 mm). The marginal bone loss changes in short implants are lower than those in long implants.

Postoperative discomfort after implant placement according to the All-on-4 concept with or without Zygoma implants: A prospective clinical study

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the study was to assess patients' postoperative discomfort after implantations according to the All-on-4 concept with and without using Zygoma implants.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Three treatment groups were formed for this prospective study: All-on-4 rehabilitation in the maxilla (group 1, N = 25), All-on-4 rehabilitation in the maxilla using at least two Zygoma implants (group 2, N = 25), and All-on-4 rehabilitation in the mandible (group 3, N = 20). Principal outcome parameters were postoperative pain (100 mm VAS) and perceived swelling (100 mm VAS). Also, the use of analgesics was documented.

RESULTS

The worst postoperative pain of 21.3 (SD 18.9) VAS was observed in group 2, but there was no statistically significant difference between the groups (mixed ANOVA p = .791). The postoperative total intake of painkillers was significantly higher in group 2 than in the other groups (p < .001). On postoperative day 28, the mean pain scores in all groups declined to values below 5 VAS. Postoperative perceived swelling in group 2 was significantly more severe than it was in group 1 and 3 (p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of Zygoma implants in All-on-4 surgical interventions had an essential effect on postoperative swelling, but less so on postoperative pain. The slightly increased, but statistically not significantly different postoperative pain in group 2 was compensated by an overall higher postoperative intake of painkillers compared to the other groups.

The Effect of the Length and Distribution of Implants for Fixed Prosthetic Reconstructions in the Atrophic Posterior Maxilla: A Finite Element Analysis

In this study, different prosthetic designs that could be applied instead of advanced surgical techniques in atrophic maxilla were evaluated with finite element analysis. Atrophic posterior maxilla was modeled using computer tomography images and four models were prepared as follows: Model 1 (M1), two implants supporting a three-unit distal cantilever prosthesis; Model 2 (M2), two implants supporting a three-unit conventional fixed partial denture; Model 3 (M3), three implants supporting three connected crowns; and Model 4 (M4), two implants supporting two connected crowns. Implants 4 mm in width and 8 mm or 13 mm in length were used. A linear three-dimensional finite element programme was used for analysis. The maximum principle stress (tensile) and minimum principle stress (compressive) were used to display stress in cortical and cancellous bones. The von Mises criteria were used to evaluate the stress on the implants. M1 was found to be the most risky model. The short dental arch case (M4) revealed the lowest stresses among the models but is not recommended when one more implant can be placed because of the bending forces that could occur at the mesial implant. In M2 and M3, the distal implants were placed bicortically between the crestal and sinus cortical plates, causing a fall of the stresses because of the bicortical stability of these implants.

Annual review of selected scientific literature: A report of the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry

This comprehensive review of the 2018 dental literature is provided to inform busy dentists about progress in the profession. Developed by the Committee on Scientific Investigation of the American Academy of Restorative Dentistry, each author brings discipline-specific expertise to one of the 8 sections of the report including (1) prosthodontics; (2) periodontics, alveolar bone, and peri-implant tissues; (3) implant dentistry; (4) dental materials and therapeutics; (5) occlusion and temporomandibular disorders; (6) sleep-related breathing disorders; (7) oral medicine and oral and maxillofacial surgery; and (8) dental caries and cariology. The report targets important information that will likely influence day-to-day treatment decisions. Each review is not intended to stand alone but to update interested readers so that they may visit source materials if greater detail is desired. As the profession continues its march toward evidence-based clinical decision-making, an already voluminous library of potentially valuable dental literature continues to grow. It is the intention of this review and its authors to provide assistance in navigating the extensive dental literature published in 2018. It is our hope that readers find this work useful in the clinical management of patients moving forward.

Do osteoconductive bone substitutes result in similar bone regeneration for maxillary sinus augmentation when compared to osteogenic and osteoinductive bone grafts? A systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis

The purpose of this network meta-analysis was to identify the most effective biomaterials producing higher new bone formation (NBF) and lower residual graft (RG) and connective tissue (CT) following maxillary sinus augmentation (MSA), and to generate a ranking based on their performance. The MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published until March 2018, evaluating histomorphometric outcomes after MSA. Predictor variables were autogenous bone (AB), allografts (AG), xenografts (XG), alloplastic bone (AP), AB+XG, AB+AP, AG+XG, XG+AP, and grafts combined with autologous platelet concentrates/recombinant growth factors, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), or recombinant bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs). Outcome variables were NBF%, RG%, and CT%. Healing time was considered. The weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated via frequentist network meta-analysis using Stata software. Fifty-two RCTs (1483 biopsies) were included. At a healing time <6 months, AB was superior to AP (WMD-10.66%, 95% CI-16.38% to -4.94%) and XG (WMD-7.93%, 95% CI-15.11% to -0.75%) for NBF. Regarding CT, AB was superior to XG+AP, AP, MSCs, and XG. At a healing time ≥6 months, NBF was higher for AB than AP (WMD-7.06%, 95% CI-12.59% to -1.52%). RG was lower in AB than AP (WMD 12.03%, 95% CI 3.04% to 21.03%), XG (WMD 14.62%, 95% CI 4.25% to 24.98%), and growth factors (WMD 12.32%, 95% CI 0.04% to 24.60%). The three highest ranked biomaterials for increasing NBF were AG+XG (95%, very low quality evidence), growth factors (69.9%, low quality evidence), and AB alone (69.8%, moderate quality evidence). The three highest ranked biomaterials for decreasing RG were BMPs (88.8%, very low quality evidence), AB alone (81.5%, moderate quality evidence), and AB+AP (58.9%, very low quality evidence). Finally, XG+AP (84.7%, low quality evidence), AP alone (77.7%, moderate quality evidence), and MSCs (76.1%, low quality evidence), were the three highest ranked biomaterials for decreasing the amount of CT. Network meta-analysis provided moderate quality evidence that AB alone is probably the best option to obtain greater NBF after MSA in the first 6 months after surgery. Additionally, the results of this network meta-analysis support the hypothesis that osteoconductive bone substitute materials should be combined with osteogenic or osteoinductive grafts for superior histomorphometric outcomes in MSA.

Short implants versus longer implants with maxillary sinus lift. A systematic review and meta-analysis

This study compared the survival rate of dental implants, amount of marginal bone loss, and rates of complications (biological and prosthetic) between short implants and long implants placed after maxillary sinus augmentation. This systematic review has been registered at PROSPERO under the number (CRD42017073929). Two reviewers searched the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and Cochrane Library databases. Eligibility criteria included randomized controlled trials, comparisons between short implants and long implants placed after maxillary sinus augmentation in the same study, and follow-up for >6 months. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias in randomized trials was used to assess the quality and risk of bias of the included studies. The search identified 1366 references. After applying the inclusion criteria, 11 trials including 420 patients who received 911 dental implants were considered eligible. No significant difference was observed in the survival rate [p = 0.86; risk ratio (RR): 1.08; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.46-2.52] or in the amount of marginal bone loss (p = 0.08; RR: -0.05; 95%CI: -0.10 to 0.01). However, higher rates of biological complications for long implants associated with maxillary sinus augmentation were observed (p < 0.00001; RR: 0.21; 95%CI: 0.10-0.41), whereas a higher prosthetic complication rate for short implants was noted (p = 0.010; RR: 3.15; 95%CI: 1.32-7.51). Short implant placement is an effective alternative because of fewer biological complications and similar survival and marginal bone loss than long implant placement with maxillary sinus augmentation. However, the risk of mechanical complications associated with the prostheses fitted on short implants should be considered.

Does intraoperative perforation of Schneiderian membrane during sinus lift surgery causes an increased the risk of implants failure?: A systematic review and meta regression analysis

PURPOSE

There is still debate whether intraoperative Schneiderian membrane (SM) perforation in the maxillary sinus lift causes an increase the risk of implants failure. The aim of this study was to assess an association between SM perforation and implants loss following the maxillary sinus lift.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies assessing association between SM perforation and implants failure based on PRISMA was conducted. Three major databases were used to gather research dating from their respective inception up until March 2018. All clinical studies expressly reported the number of the SM perforation and implants loss that installed in the perforated and nonperforated sinuses were included. The statistical analyses used were Pearson's correlation, simple linear regression, and meta regression. The risk ratio (RR) of implant loss between perforated and nonperforated sites was estimated.

RESULTS

A total of 2947 patients with 3884 maxillary sinuses augmentations who received 7358 implants, enrolled in 58 studies were included in this study. There was a significant relationship between the implants' failure and SM perforation according to simple linear regression (P < .001) and meta regression analysis (P = .06). There was a significant decrease (moderate quality evidence) in implant loss in the nonperforated sinuses compared to perforated sunrises (RR = 2.17, CI: 1.52-3.10, P = .001). There was also no significant association between implant loss in the perforated sinuses and the surgical devices used (piezosurgical or rotary), surgical approach applied (lateral or crestal sinus lift), barrier membrane used and type of bone grafting materials.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study showed that an intraoperative SM perforation could increase the risk of implant failure after the sinus lift surgery.

What Is the Most Effective Rehabilitation Method for Posterior Maxillas With 4 to 8 mm of Residual Alveolar Bone Height Below the Maxillary Sinus With Implant-Supported Prostheses? A Frequentist Network Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

The most effective rehabilitation method for patients with edentulous posterior maxillas with an intermediate (4 to 8 mm) residual bone height (RBH) below the maxillary sinus is unclear. Evidence derived from conventional meta-analysis is limited because of the lack of head-to-head studies. This network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to identify the most effective method to treat patients with intermediate posterior RBH.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An NMA of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) was conducted to assess various rehabilitation methods using implant-supported prostheses for patients with intermediate posterior maxillary RBH (4 to 8 mm). Publications from 1970 through March 2018 in 3 major databases were searched. Parallel and split-mouth RCTs that reported the outcomes of interest with follow-up of at least 6 months from initial loading were included. Predictor variables were short implants (SIs; ≤8 mm) alone, SIs in conjunction with osteotome sinus floor elevation (OSFE) with or without bone grafting, long implants (LIs) in conjunction with OSFE with and without bone grafting, and LIs combined with lateral sinus floor elevation (LSFE) with bone grafting. Outcome variables were implant and prosthesis failure rates, marginal bone loss, and complications. Frequentist NMA was performed using STATA software.

RESULTS

Twenty RCTs involving 770 patients with intermediate posterior maxillary RBH and 837 concerned maxillary sinuses who received 1,486 implants using any of the 4 rehabilitation methods were included. There were no statistically significant differences among the 4 groups for implant and prosthesis failure rates and marginal bone loss at follow-up (range, 6 months to 5 years after loading). There was a marked decrease in complications for SIs alone compared with LIs combined with LSFE. For implant and prosthesis survival rates, SIs in conjunction with OSFE with or without bone grafting ranked first as the most effective option (77.1%) followed by LIs plus OSFE with or without bone grafting (62%), LIs plus LSFE with bone grafting (43.9%), and SIs alone (24.8%).

CONCLUSION

There is moderate-quality evidence derived from this NMA showing that OSFE combined with SI or LI placement with or without bone grafting or SI placement alone is superior to LI placement combined with LSFE and bone grafting when used for patients with intermediate maxillary RBH (4 to 8 mm). Furthermore, the results of this study show that LSFE for patients with intermediate RBH is not a suitable treatment option because of unjustified high cost and rate of complications.