Mini-Invasive Osteotome Sinus Floor Elevation in Partially Edentulous Atrophic Maxilla Using Reduced Length Dental Implants: Interim Results of a Prospective Study

Single versus splinted short implants at sinus augmented sites: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This review primarily evaluated the success, survival and failure rates of implants shorter than 10 mm restored with single-unit or splinted fixed dental prostheses in maxillary sinus augmented sites.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Two reviewers independently performed the systematic search of electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL, up to September 2019 with no language restriction. A supplemental hand search consisted of screening 13 journals. The inclusion criteria were: primary studies reporting implant, prosthetic and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of extra-short and short implants placed in conjunction with sinus floor elevation in partially dentate patients, restored with single- and splinted-crowns for direct comparison, with a minimal 1-year follow-up. Weighted arithmetic mean (WAM) of the implant survival was performed according to the type of prosthesis. This was confirmed by using Review Manager software to perform meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Two observational studies reporting on 106 tapered, press-fit, sintered porous-surfaced implants with a length ranging from 5 mm to 9 mm were included in this systematic review. Of these, 20 and 86 implants were restored with single and splinted prostheses, respectively. The risk ratio (RR) was 1.16 (95% CI: .31-4.30, p = .58, I² = 0%) for individually restored implants failure when compared to splinted implants, indicating that short dental implants restored with single crowns could have a 16% higher possibility of failure if compared to implants with splinted crowns. The heterogeneity value was not statistically significative (p = .58). No statistical difference in the implant survival rate of the two types of analysed prostheses was observed after WAM (p= .923). The level of evidence for the included studies ranged from low (4) to fair (2B).

CONCLUSION

Similar clinical outcomes up to a 9-year follow-up were observed in single and splinted porous-surfaced implants shorter than 10 mm located in sites with sinus lift. However, the conclusion shall be interpreted with caution due to the level of evidence and limited number of included studies included in this systematic review.

Therapeutic outcomes of non-grafted and platelet concentrations-grafted transcrestal maxillary sinus elevation (TSFE): a systematic review and meta-analysis

To evaluate and compare the stability, quantity and quality of bone augmentation at maxillary sinus elevation sites by non-grafted transcrestal sinus floor elevation (TSFE) and platelet concentration grafted transcrestal sinus floor elevation (PC-TSFE). A complete literature search was performed up to April 2019. Clinical controlled trials, retrospective cohort studies, and prospective cohort studies were selected based on inclusion criteria. The clinical outcomes were implant survival rate (ISR), marginal/crestal bone loss (MBL/CBL) and endo-sinus bone gain (ESBG). Meta‐analysis was conducted on these 1-year based values. Furthermore, another meta-analysis on 1-year ISR value was conducted among studies with different residual bone heights (RBH) within the non-grafted TSFE group. A total of 18 studies were included: 13 in TSFE group and 5 in PC-TSFE group. No significant differences were displayed between the 1-year ISR of TSFE (97%, 95%CI = 0.96–0.99) and PC-TSFE group (99%, 95%CI = 0.97–1.00). Among the various studies with different RBH within TSFE group, no significant differences in 1-year ISR were displayed. The 1-year MBL/CBL value of PC-TSFE group (0.73 mm, 95%CI = 0.43–1.13 mm) did not show significant difference as compared to TSFE group (0.60 mm, 95%CI = 0.10–1.10 mm). Furthermore, no significant enhancement was observed on 1-year ESBG value on PC-TSFE group (3.51 mm, 95%CI = 2.31–4.71 mm) in comparison with the TSFE group (2.87 mm, 95%CI = 2.18m–3.55 mm). Grafting platelet concentrations around dental implants at TSFE sites did not significantly enhance the adjacent bone regeneration. Moreover, TSFE was shown to be a reliable therapeutic option for implant sites that need simultaneous maxillary sinus augmentation, even under limited RBH.

Fifteen-Year Follow-up of Short Dental Implants in the Completely Edentulous Jaw: Submerged Versus Nonsubmerged Healing

PURPOSE

Short implants are a minimally invasive alternative in the management of alveolar bone atrophy. This study aimed to assess the influence of the surgical approach (1-stage vs 2-stage) on the 15-year survival and marginal bone loss of short implants in a fixed complete denture.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective clinical study was conducted in a single private dental clinic that included short implants placed between January 2001 and December 2002.

RESULTS

Forty-one short implants supported 18 screw-retained complete dentures. The mean follow-up time was 15 ± 3 years. The surgical approach (1-stage vs 2-stage) did not significantly affect implant survival and marginal bone loss. The implant survival rate was 90.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Short dental implants could be predictably indicated to support fixed complete dentures. The implants could be placed through a 1- or 2-stage surgery.

Plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF) in intraoral bone grafting procedures: A systematic review

PURPOSE

This systematic review aimed at assessing the effects of PRGF in new bone formation, soft tissue healing and post-operative pain and swelling in sites that underwent ridge preservation, ridge augmentation and maxillary sinus augmentation procedures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature search employing seven databases was conducted by two independent reviewers. Only randomized and non-randomized controlled clinical trials using PRGF alone or in combination with bone grafting materials were selected.

RESULTS

Overall, 919 studies were identified, of which a total of 8 articles were included in the qualitative analysis. Two of the selected studies reported on ridge preservation, one on ridge augmentation and five on maxillary sinus augmentation. Positive results were recorded for soft tissue healing and post-operative pain and swelling following these procedures. However, outcomes of PRGF on new bone formation post extraction and on maxillary sinus augmentation when combined with other biomaterials were conflicting. Meta-analysis could not be conducted for any variables due to the heterogeneity of selected studies.

CONCLUSION

Limited evidence exists on the effects of PRGF in different intraoral bone grafting procedures, with some benefit reported on soft tissue healing and post-operative symptomatology. As this platelet concentrate is commonly used in clinical practice, further research is needed to fully assess its clinical indications and effectiveness.

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.

Outcomes of 6.5-mm Hydrophilic Implants and Long Implants Placed with Lateral Sinus Floor Elevation in the Atrophic Posterior Maxilla: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Clinical Comparison

BACKGROUND

Very few controlled studies have compared short and long implants placed with appropriate sinus floor elevation techniques.

PURPOSE

To compare the 2-year outcomes of 6.5-mm hydrophilic implants placed with osteotome sinus floor elevation (OSFE) and standard implants placed with lateral sinus floor elevation in patients with a severely atrophic posterior maxilla.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-eight patients with a residual bone height of 4-5 mm were randomized to receive one of the two above-mentioned treatments. Intra- and postoperative complications were recorded. The implant survival rate, peri-implant bone level, and periapical endosinus bone gain were assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 80 inserted implants, one in the long implant group failed because of abscess formation. The peri-implant bone level change (0.35 ± 0.60 mm vs 0.40 ± 0.71 mm) was not significantly different between the two groups. The endosinus bone gain was 2.94 ± 0.81 mm and 10.19 ± 0.95 mm in the short and long implant groups, respectively. No serious adverse events related to implant surgery were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that the placement of 6.5-mm short implants with OSFE is an effective alternative for the rehabilitation of a severely atrophic posterior maxilla.

Dental Implant Length and Diameter: A Proposed Classification Scheme

PURPOSE

To propose a length-and-diameter-based classification scheme for dental implants to standardize terminology in the dental literature and communication between interested parties.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was mainly based on searching two major resources: published scientific research papers and 14 of the most popular dental implant manufacturers. Indexed databases were searched from January 2004 up to and including February 2016 using the keywords "dental implant length" and "dental implant diameter." Retrieved titles and abstracts were screened, and related full-text articles were reviewed. Full-text articles that clearly stated the terms and measurements of implants used were included and considered for proposing this classification scheme.

RESULTS

The initial search for implant diameter and length yielded 1007 and 936 articles, respectively. A total of 85 studies (41 about diameter, 44 about length) were selected and reviewed. The remaining studies (966 about diameter, 892 about length) that did not abide by the eligibility criteria were excluded. The terms "long," "short," "standard," "wide," and "narrow" were the most commonly used terms in the literature. A classification scheme for implants by diameter and length was proposed.

CONCLUSIONS

Indexed publications contain a variety of terms used by authors to describe diameter and length of dental implants without conformity and standardization. The classification scheme proposed in this article could serve as a reference for interested parties.

Is Alveolar Ridge Split a Risk Factor for Implant Survival?

PURPOSE

There is a paucity of studies that have assessed the long-term outcomes of the alveolar ridge split (ARS). This study evaluated the intraoperative and postoperative complications and assessed the placed dental implant and prosthesis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study of the ARS was conducted in a single private dental clinic. The predictor variable was the ARS technique (1 stage vs 2 stages). The primary outcome was the dental implant survival rate. Secondary outcomes were intraoperative complications, marginal bone loss, prosthetic complications, and prosthesis success rate. Descriptive analysis was performed for patients' demographic data, implant details, and prosthetic complications. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to assess implant survival rate and prosthesis success rate.

RESULTS

Twenty patients (mean age, 55 ± 6 yr) had a mean follow-up time of 5 years. Delayed implant placement was performed when the residual alveolar bone width was narrower than 3 mm. No intraoperative or postoperative complications were reported. The survival rate of the 31 implants was 100% and the prosthesis success rate was 96.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

The ARS is an effective technique for horizontal bone augmentation in the mandible. Delayed dental implant placement when the alveolar bone width is narrower than 3 mm could minimize the risk of buccal wall fracture.

Predictability of short implants ( < 10 mm) as a treatment option for the rehabilitation of atrophic maxillae. A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Short implants (< 10 mm) are one of the treatment options available in cases of limited vertical bone. Although such implants are now widely used, there is controversy regarding their clinical reliability. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the predictability of short implants as an alternative to technically more complex treatments in patients with atrophic maxillae, based on a systematic review of the literature and the analysis of the implant survival rates, changes in peri-implant bone level, and associated complications. It is postulated that short implants offer clinical results similar to those of longer implants.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A Medline-PubMed search was made covering the period between January 2004 and December 2014 (both included). Studies in English published in indexed journals, involving at least 20 implants and with a follow-up period of at least 12 months were considered. A manual search in four high impact journals was also conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 37 studies meeting the inclusion criteria were included in this review. 9792 implants placed in over 5000 patients were analyzed.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of this review, short implants are seen to offer clinical results in terms of survival, bone loss and complications similar to those of longer implants.

Rehabilitation of Atrophied Low-Density Posterior Maxilla by Implant-Supported Prosthesis

The rehabilitation of edentulous posterior maxilla is a challenging task that could be complicated by the availability of low-density and reduced height of alveolar bone. Patients were enrolled in this study upon the presence of type IV bone and residual bone height <5 mm in posterior maxilla. Novel procedure for transalveolar sinus floor elevation was described to insert 10 short implants in 4 patients. Neither implant failure nor prosthetic failure was observed during a follow-up of 44 ± 3 months. Mesial bone loss of 0.5 ± 0.6 mm and a distal bone loss 1.3 ± 0.9 mm were measured after 35 ± 4 months of loading.