Survival rates of ultra-short (<6 mm) compared with short locking-taper implants supporting single crowns in posterior areas: A 5-year retrospective study

Background

Short and ultra‐short implants represent a predictable treatment, in terms of implant survival, with patients presenting insufficient available bone volumes. Moreover, single crown restorations represent a gold standard in terms of oral hygiene.

Purpose

The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate implant survival, marginal bone loss, and peri‐implant complications in 333 locking‐taper short and ultra‐short implants.

Materials and Methods

Implants were placed in the maxillary and mandibular posterior regions of 142 patients. Clinical and radiographic examinations were performed at 5‐year recall appointments.

Results

All implants placed consisted of 8.0‐, 6.0‐, and 5.0‐mm length, 38.14%, 34.53%, and 27.33%, respectively. Three hundred thirty‐two implants (one early failure) were rehabilitated with single crowns in 141 patients. In 45.48% of the implants the crown‐to‐implant ratio was ≥2, with a mean value of 1.94. Overall implant‐based survival after 5 years of follow‐up was 96.10%: 96.85%, 95.65%, and 95.60% for 8.0‐, 6.0‐, and 5.0‐mm length implants, respectively (p = 0.82). Overall patient‐based survival was 91.55%. Regarding crestal bone level variations, average crestal bone loss and apical shift of the “first bone‐to‐implant contact point” position were 0.69 and 0.01 mm, respectively. Setting the threshold for excessive bone loss at 1 mm, during the time interval from loading to follow‐up, 28 implants experienced loss of supporting bone greater than 1 mm: 19 of them (67.85%) were surgically treated with a codified surgical regenerative protocol. After 60 months, a peri‐implantitis prevalence of 5.94% was reported, with an overall implant success of 94.06%: 95.93%, 92.73%, and 93.10% for 8.0‐, 6.0‐, and 5.0‐mm length implants, respectively (p = 0.55).

Conclusion

Long‐term outcomes suggest that short and ultra‐short locking‐taper implants can be successfully restored with single crowns in the posterior area of the maxilla and mandible.

Clinical Behavior of Short Dental Implants: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Short implants are an increasingly common alternative to other surgical techniques in areas where bone availability is reduced. Despite the advantages they offer, a variety of biological repercussions have been described in the literature that can even lead to the loss of these. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the impact of the use of short implants on their survival and on peri-implant bone loss, evaluating the influence that length, diameter, and crown-to-implant ratio (C/I) have on these parameters. This systematic review was based on guidelines proposed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). An electronic search was conducted using terms related to the use of short implants in partially or totally edentulous patients. A total of five databases were consulted in the literature search: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science. After eliminating the duplicate articles and assessing which ones met the inclusion criteria, 15 articles were included for the qualitative analysis and 14 for the quantitative study. Through meta-analysis, the percentage of implant loss and peri-implant bone loss was estimated. Relating these parameters to length, diameter, and C/I ratio, no significant differences have been found for implant loss (values of p = 0.06, 0.10, and 0.9, respectively for length, diameter, and C/I ratio), nor for peri-implant bone loss (values of p = 0.71, 0.72, and 0.36, respectively for length, diameter, and C/I ratio). In conclusion, the use of short implants does not seem to have a significant influence on marginal bone loss or the survival rate of implants.

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.

Is there an effect of crown-to-implant ratio on implant treatment outcomes? A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

High crown-to-implant ratios may lead to complications due to unfavorable occlusal forces, including nonaxial forces, on the bone surrounding the neck of the implant and within the connection of the crown and implant itself. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review on the influence of crown-to-implant ratio of single-tooth, nonsplinted, implants on biological and technical complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE (1950-January 2018), EMBASE (1966-January 2018), and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials database (1800-January 2018) were searched to identify eligible studies. Inclusion criteria were as follows: crown-to-implant ratio of single-tooth, nonsplinted, implant-supported restorations in the posterior maxilla or mandible and follow-up of at least 1 year. Main outcome measures were as follows: implant survival rate, marginal bone level changes, biological complications, and technical complications. Two reviewers independently assessed the articles. A meta-analysis was carried out for implant survival rate and peri-implant bone changes.

RESULTS

Of 154 primarily selected articles, eight studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Study groups presented a mean crown-to-implant ratio varying from 0.86 (with 10-mm implants) to 2.14 (with 6-mm implants). The meta-analysis showed an implant survival of more than 99% per year and mean peri-implant bone changes of <0.1 mm per year. Limited biological and technical complications were reported.

CONCLUSION

Data reviewed in the current manuscript on crown-to-implant ratio, ranging from 0.86 to 2.14, of single-tooth, nonsplinted, implants did not demonstrate a high occurrence of biological or technical complications.

Influence of crown-to-implant ratio on stress around single short-wide implants: a photoelastic stress analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the photoelastic fringe patterns around two short-wide implants supporting single crowns with different crown-to-implant (C/I) ratios.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

External hexagon (EH) cylindrical implants (5 × 7 mm) or Morse Taper (MT) conical implants (5 × 6 mm) were embedded individually into photoelastic resin blocks. Each implant received a single metal-ceramic crown, with a C/I ratio of 1:1 or 2:1 (n = 10). Each set was positioned in a polariscope and submitted to a 0.5 kgf compressive load, applied axially or obliquely (30°). The polariscope images were digitally recorded, and based on isoclinal and isochromatic fringes, the shear stress was calculated at 5 predetermined points around each implant. Data were analyzed by two-way ANOVA (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

Under axial loading, the stress was concentrated at the crestal region, and there were no differences between C/I ratio or implant types. In contrast, under oblique loading, EH implants showed lower stress values than the MT group and the 2:1 C/I ratio showed higher stress concentration for both implant types (p < 0.05). Moreover, MT implants showed stress distribution through a higher area than the EH implant did, with a tendency to direct the stress toward the implant's apex under oblique loading.

CONCLUSION

MT conical short-wide implants showed higher stress values that were distributed through a higher area directed to the implant apex. The C/I ratio influences the stress distribution only under oblique loading.

Effect of Crown to Implant Ratio and Anatomical Crown Length on Clinical Conditions in a Single Implant: A Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate the long-term influence of the crown-to-implant (C/I) ratio and anatomical crown length on clinical conditions around Astra single dental implants placed in the premolar and molar regions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy-six subjects were selected from patients who had been treated with single Astra implants for replacement of missing premolars and molars. The peri-implant marginal bone level change was assessed 1 year after functional loading and 6 years after functional loading. To predict the peri-implant marginal bone level change using clinical and radiographic data, a multiple linear regression model was applied. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to analyze difference median in technical complications.

RESULTS

The C/I ratio and anatomical crown length were not associated with peri-implant marginal bone loss or changes in the bone level at 6 years (p = .48, p = .31). However, the modified plaque index, modified sulcus bleeding index, and smoking status influenced the peri-implant marginal bone loss (p < .05, r(2)  = 0.54). In addition, the patient with technical complication group did show significantly increased anatomical crown length (p < .05) CONCLUSIONS: The higher C/I ratio and anatomical crown length did not increase the risk of peri-implant marginal bone loss during 6 years of functional loading. In addition, higher anatomical crown lengths are associated with higher technical complications.