Prosthetic Rehabilitation of the Partially Edentulous Atrophic Posterior Mandible with Short Implants (≤ 8 mm) Compared with the Sandwich Osteotomy and Delayed Placement of Standard Length Implants (> 8 mm): a Systematic Review

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

OBJECTIVES

Does the angulation of ultrashort implants influence the stability of the peri-implant bone? The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of non-axial ultrashort implants after 2 to 9 years of follow-up in resorbed alveolar ridges.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All partially edentulous patients with ultrashort implants (< 6 mm) used in the posterior region of an atrophic mandible or maxilla, to support partial dentures in conjunction with standard implants, were included in this study. Peri-implant bone loss, success and survival rates, crestal bone levels, crown-to-implant ratio and implant angulation were measured for each implant. Implants were divided into two groups: straight implants with angulation < 17° (control group) and tilted implants with angulation > 17° (test group). Statistical analysis was used to find any significant differences between the two study groups and to investigate significant linear correlations among all the variables (p = 0.05).

RESULTS

A total of 42 ultrashort implants with a mean of 4 years of follow-up were included: 20 ultrashort axially loaded implants and 22 tilted implants. Mean crestal bone levels from baseline loading to maximum follow-up did not reveal statistical differences in regard to PBL; mean success and survival rates were 100% in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

PBL, success and survival rates of axial ultrashort implants and tilted ultrashort implants are comparable to those of conventional implants.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This retrospective study revealed that ultrashort implants, even when placed with an angulation > 17°, can safely be used to support partial fixed prostheses. Further prospective clinical studies with larger samples and prospective design are needed to confirm these findings.

Clinical efficacy of transcrestal sinus floor augmentation, in comparison with lateral approach, in sites with residual bone height ≤6 mm: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This paper addressed two focused questions: Focused question 1 (Q1) "what is the clinical efficacy of transcrestal sinus floor augmentation (TSFA), as compared to lateral sinus floor augmentation (LSFA) in sites with residual bone height (RBH) ≤6 mm, in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs)?"; Focused question 2 (Q2) "what is the estimated effectiveness of TSFA for outcomes in Q1, in RCTs, CCTs or cohort studies?"

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search (PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and hand search were conducted from January 1986 until December 2022. All eligible clinical studies expressly reporting TSFA in sites with RBH ≤6 mm were included. The data were extracted, and the risk of bias in individual studies was evaluated. Meta-analysis was performed whenever possible.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs were included for Q1 and 25 studies (9 RCTs, 2 CCTs, 14 single arm cohort studies) for Q2. Q1: Meta-analysis did not show significant difference in the implant survival, sinus membrane perforation and marginal bone loss between TSFA and LSFA groups. Q2: Meta-analysis showed TSFA had a high implant survival rate (96.5%, 95% CI: 93.2%-98.9%) at least 1 year after surgery, and limited sinus membrane perforation (5.4%, 95% CI: 2.7%-8.8%). The results also presented higher patient satisfaction for TSFA.

CONCLUSION

With the limitations of the present study (high risk of bias in individual studies), it can be concluded that there was no significant difference in implant survival, Schneiderian membrane perforation and MBL between two approaches in sites with RBH ≤6 mm.

Short implants compared to regular dental implants after bone augmentation in the atrophic posterior mandible: umbrella review and meta-analysis of success outcomes

PURPOSE

To assess the body of evidence of short versus regular implants after bone augmentation (BA) in the atrophic posterior mandible in the context of implant treatment success outcomes.

METHODS

Seven databases, two registries, and reference lists were searched for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (SR/MA), randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and longitudinal studies published in English, Spanish or German since 2012. Confidence in the SR/MA methodology was evaluated using AMSTAR-2 and the risk of bias of primary studies using Cochrane's RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I. A random-effects meta-analysis and a meta-regression were performed for continuous and dichotomous outcomes. GRADE approach was used to assess the certainty of the evidence.

RESULTS

Eighteen SRs/MAs, most of them "critically low" and "low" confidence with substantial overlap, included 14 relevant RCTs with a high risk of bias. A cohort study with moderate risk of bias was added. Quantitative synthesis of 595 implants and 281 hemiarches/patients indicates that the use of short implants (< 10 mm) compared to regular implants and BA may reduce implant failure at 1-year follow-up, and marginal bone loss (MBL) at 3-, 5-, and 8-year follow-up; is likely to reduce the risk of biological complications at 1-, 3-, 5-, and 8-year follow-up; and may be the patient's preferred alternative. There is a correlation between bone height, MBL and biological complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence partially suggests that the use of short implants could decrease implant failure, MBL, and biological complications, and increase patient satisfaction. However, given the need for further RCTs and real-world evidence to fully evaluate short- and long-term outcomes, it would be prudent for clinicians to carefully consider the individual needs and circumstances of the patients before deciding whether to use short implants. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42022333526.

Does the Protrusion of Corticobasal Implants in the Maxillary Sinuses Affect Sinus Health? A Retrospective Study

AIM

The aim of this retrospective study is to investigate the effect of corticobasal implant penetration in the nasal and maxillary sinuses on sinus health and implant survival rate in cases of severely atrophid ridges.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted on thirty patients with 172 implants who underwent corticobasal implant treatment between 2014 and 2018. Implants were divided into two groups according to the penetration depths (Group A, <4 mm; Group B, 4 mm). Inclusion criteria for the study included: (A) patients with severe maxillary ridge resorption with an immediately loaded corticobasal implant-supported prosthesis that showed implant protrusion inside the maxillary sinus on cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT); and (B) patients with a preoperative and postoperative follow-up CBCT scan using the same standard technique and machine. (C) Patients without any history of sinusitis before implant insertion patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were recalled for follow-up. The presence of sinus complications was clinically assessed according to the clinical practice guidelines for adult sinusitis of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery and Radiologically using CBCT. Moreover, patient satisfaction was evaluated using yes-or-no questions. The result was statistically analyzed using Fisher's Exact test.

RESULTS

Despite the differences in implant penetration depths, no clinical signs of sinusitis were evident in any patient. One patient presented with transient epistaxis after the surgery, and 2 patients with nine implants revealed nonsignificant thickening of the sinus membrane radiologically (p = 0.055). All implants showed optimum bone-implant contact with a 100% survival rate. A significant relationship was reported between the thickness of the membrane and the patient's gender, hypertension, and smoking habits. (p = 0.001*, p = 0.002*, and p = 0.034*, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Penetration of corticobasal implants in the maxillary sinus did not compromise the health of the maxillary sinus or implant survival rate.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Limited posterior maxillary bony support and maxillary sinus pneumatization present challenges in implant dentistry and increase the possibility of implant protrusion inside the maxillary and nasal cavities. Hence, studying the effect of this protrusion on the maxillary sinuses' health and implant survival is highly significant.

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

Introduction

The aim of this study was to verify whether the use of short implants could optimize stress distribution of bone surrounding implants in atrophic mandibles with different bone qualities.

Methods

A three-dimensional model of the atrophic mandible with three levels of bone quality was made using computer software. Short implants (6 mm) and standard implants (10 mm) were used in four designs: Design 1 "All-On four", Design 2 "All-On-four" with two short implants, Design 3 four vertical implants with two short implants, and Design 4 six short implants. The distal short implants were placed at the first molar position. All twelve models were imported into finite element analysis software, and 110 N oblique force was loaded on the left second premolar. Maximum principal stress values of peri-implant bone and the volumes of bone with over 3000 microstrians (overload)were analyzed.

Result

Stress values and volumes of overload bone increased in all four groups with the decline of bone quality. The highest stress values were found in the cortical bone surrounding the Design 1 inclined implant in two lower bone quality mandibles, and the lowest in Design 3. However, Design 1 had less overload bone tissue than all three designs with short implants.

Conclusion

Short implants placed posteriorly helped decrease stress values in peri-implant bone, while bone surrounding short implants had a high resorption risk in low bone quality mandible.

Posterior jaws rehabilitation with < 7mm-short implants. A review

INTRODUCTION

The results with shorter and shorter implants have been revolutionizing the implantology scenario and are worthy of being well-analyzed and understood. This review aims to add further knowledge about the last 10-years observation period on < 7mm-short implants in the posterior atrophic jaws, better defining the indication of their use.

METHODS

From a Medline database research, systematic reviews, controlled and no- controlled trials (CT, n-CT) with ≥ 3years-follow-ups on <7 mm / ≥ 5mm-short implants (group A), and clinical studies with ≥ 1year-follow-up on 4mm-short implants (group B) were considered. The outcomes, in terms of implant survival rate (SR), marginal bone loss (MBL), and complications were analyzed according to the duration of follow-ups, implant site (maxilla and mandible), type of prosthesis (single crown or splinted units), vertically impaired or normal sites.

RESULTS

Thirty-four trials (28 for group A and six for group B) were selected. Group A: a mean follow up of 5,8 (3-10) years came out; pre-and post-loading SR range was 94.4- 100% and 89.6-100%, respectively; the range of MBL was 0.12-1.49; 50% of CT found less statistically significant surgical complications in comparison with standard implants (ST) in reconstructed sites, while major prosthetic problems were recorded with short -implants (SH) in 37.5% of CT; in no atrophied sites, a mean SR range of 86.7-100 % vs. 88-100 % and a total bone loss of 2 vs.1.6 for SH vs.ST emerged. Group B: the overall mean follow-up period was 2,3 years, and the pre-and post- SR ranges were 93-100 % and 87.5-100 %, respectively. The MBL range was 0.02- 0.63 mm. All RCT reported significantly fewer surgical complications with SH than with ST in reconstructed mandibles within one year. No prosthetic complications were reported for up to 5 years using no pontics or cantilevers fixed bridges.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar or even better results for SH than ST in terms of post-loading SR and MBL came out for < 7mm/ ≥ 5mm-short implants in atrophic bone regardless of the prosthetic solutions, with less surgical complications but a few more prosthetic problems; the good results up to 5 years for 4mm-short implants in mandibles are associated with splinted and no-risk prosthetic solutions.

The survival rate of transcrestal sinus floor elevation combined with short implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Background

Currently, insufficient bone volume always occurs in the posterior maxilla which makes implantation difficult. Short implants combined with transcrestal sinus floor elevation (TSFE) may be an option to address insufficient bone volume.

Purpose

The clinical performance of short implants combined with TSFE was compared with that of conventional implants combined with TSFE according to the survival rate.

Method

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we followed the Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. Articles were identified through PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and manual searching. Eligibility criteria included clinical human studies. The quality assessment was performed according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines. The odds ratio (OR) with its confidence interval (CI) was considered the essential outcome for estimating the effect of short implants combined with TSFE.

Results

The registration number is INPLASY202050092. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria, including 1 cohort study and 10 cross-sectional studies. With respect to the 1-year survival rate, no significant effect was observed between short implants (length ≤ 8 mm) and conventional implants combined with TSFE (I²=0%, OR=1.04, 95% CI: 0.55-1.96). Similarly, no difference was seen between the two groups regarding the survival rate during the healing period (I²=10%, OR=0.74, 95% CI: 0.28-1.97) and 3-year loading (OR=1.76, 95% CI: 0.65-4.74).

Conclusion

There was no evidence that the survival rate of short implants combined with TSFE was lower or higher than that of conventional implants combined with TSFE when the residual bone height was poor and the implant protrusion length of short implants was less than or similar to conventional implants. Nevertheless, the results should be interpreted cautiously due to the lack of random controlled trials in our meta-analysis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40729-021-00325-y.

Vertical bone augmentation and regular implants versus short implants in the vertically deficient posterior mandible: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized studies

The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the outcomes of short dental implants (≤7mm) versus vertical bone augmentation followed by regular dental implants (>7mm) in the deficient posterior mandible. In total, eight RCTs (six using interpositional sandwich grafting and two using a guided bone regeneration technique) were reported in 17 articles at different time points. In the meta-analysis of the sandwich group, the relative risk (RR) for implant loss at 1year was in favour of short implants (RR 0.41, P=0.02), while no significant difference was found at 3 years (RR 0.65, P=0.43), 5 years (RR 1.08, P=0.86), or 8 years (RR 1.53, P=0.52). The risk of complications was in favour of short implants (RR 0.34, P=0.0002), as was the mean difference in marginal bone resorption after 1 year (-0.09mm, P=0.17), 3 years (-0.32mm, P<0.00001), 5 years (-0.65mm, P<0.00001), and 8 years (-0.88, P<0.00001). The mean residual osseointegration length of the implants was between 2.94mm and 4.44mm in the short implants group and between 7.97mm and 8.62mm in the regular implants group after 5 years. In conclusion, in the deficient atrophic posterior mandible, short implants and regular implants demonstrate comparable outcomes within the first 5 years. Patients who are fit for surgery should be informed about the risks and benefits of both options.

Virtual Bone Augmentation in Atrophic Mandible to Assess Optimal Implant-Prosthetic Rehabilitation—A Finite Element Study

The scope of our study was to analyze the impact of implant prosthetic rehabilitation, in bilateral terminal partial edentulism with mandibular bone atrophy, and potential benefits of mandibular bone augmentation through finite element analysis. A 3D mandible model was made using patient-derived cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images, presenting a bilateral terminal edentation and mandibular atrophy. A virtual simulation of bone augmentation was then made. Implant-supported restorations were modeled for each edentulous area. Forces corresponding to the pterygoid and the masseter muscles, as well as mastication conditions for each quadrant, were applied. The resorbed mandible presented high values of strain and stress. A considerable variation between strain values among the two implant sites in each quadrant was found. In the augmented model, values of strain and stress showed a uniformization in both quadrants. Virtually increasing bone mass in the resorbed areas of the mandible showed that enabling larger implants drastically reduces strain and stress values in the implant sites. Also, although ridge height difference between the two quadrants was kept even after bone augmentation, there is a uniformization of the strain values between the two implant sites in each of the augmented mandible quadrants.