Background
The survival/ success rates of short implants on the rehabilitation of partially edentulous patients has been proved to be as high as those of longer implants. However, the actual role of short implants on the rehabilitation of totally edentulous patients with full-arch restorations remains unclear.
Aim/Hypothesis
To assess the Marginal Bone Loss (MBL), the Failure Proportions (FPs), and the Biological and Prosthetic Complication Proportions (BCPs/PCPs) of short (≤ 8-mm) implants supporting either fixed or removable full-arch restorations in the edentulous mandible and the risk factors for failures and/or complications.
Material and Methods
Two independent and calibrated reviewers performed a comprehensive electronic search at six databases, including gray literature. Handsearch through the references lists was also performed. Strict eligibility criteria were applied to studies throughout the 2-phases screening process. Contact with authors was attempted to clarify eligibility and collect missing data. Prospective studies assessing short (≤8-mm) dental implants, splinted or not to conventional implants, and supporting either fixed or removable full-arch restorations in the edentulous mandible, with at least 1-year post-loading follow-up, were included. The mean marginal bone loss (MBL), the proportion of implant failures and the proportion of complications of a biological or prosthetic nature were recorded, as well as the risk factors related to failures and/or complications. Quality assessment of the included papers was performed using a validated protocol.
Results
Electronic and hand-search yielded 14 and 8 studies, respectively, for phase 2 (full-text) screening. Eight articles, resulting from 6 (1 RCT, and 5 case series) prospective studies met the eligibility criteria and had data extracted. Quality assessment showed a medium methodological quality among the included trials (mean score: 13 ± 1; range: 12-14). In total, 291 short implants (lengths 5-8 mm; mean drop-out rate: 1.3%) were placed in 122 patients (90 females; mean age: 64.7 ± 10.8; range: 34-92 years old) supporting 23 fixed and 99 removable full-arch restorations. Post-loading follow-up period ranged from 12 to 120 months (33 ± 43 months). Fixed reconstructions showed mean radiographic marginal bone loss of 0.14 ± 0.08mm, whereas means FP, BCP and PCP were 1.5%, 0% and 53.3%, respectively. Removable full-arch restorations (overdentures) showed mean radiographic marginal bone loss of 0.06 ± 0.04mm, whereas means FP, BCP and PCP were 1.7%, 13.1% and 2.6%, respectively.
Conclusions and clinical implications
Full-arch restorations supported by short implants in atrophic edentulous mandibles seem to be a predictable treatment option in the short- and long-term, with minimal implant failure and biological complication proportions, regardless of the type of prosthesis. Nevertheless, the mean marginal bone loss and the proportion of prosthetic complications with fixed restorations were higher. The role of prosthetic parameters influenced by the addition of short implants remains unclear.
Background
The survival/ success rates of short implants on the rehabilitation of partially edentulous patients has been proved to be as high as those of longer implants. However, the actual role of short implants on the rehabilitation of totally edentulous patients with full-arch restorations remains unclear.
Aim/Hypothesis
To assess the Marginal Bone Loss (MBL), the Failure Proportions (FPs), and the Biological and Prosthetic Complication Proportions (BCPs/PCPs) of short (≤ 8-mm) implants supporting either fixed or removable full-arch restorations in the edentulous mandible and the risk factors for failures and/or complications.
Material and Methods
Two independent and calibrated reviewers performed a comprehensive electronic search at six databases, including gray literature. Handsearch through the references lists was also performed. Strict eligibility criteria were applied to studies throughout the 2-phases screening process. Contact with authors was attempted to clarify eligibility and collect missing data. Prospective studies assessing short (≤8-mm) dental implants, splinted or not to conventional implants, and supporting either fixed or removable full-arch restorations in the edentulous mandible, with at least 1-year post-loading follow-up, were included. The mean marginal bone loss (MBL), the proportion of implant failures and the proportion of complications of a biological or prosthetic nature were recorded, as well as the risk factors related to failures and/or complications. Quality assessment of the included papers was performed using a validated protocol.
Results
Electronic and hand-search yielded 14 and 8 studies, respectively, for phase 2 (full-text) screening. Eight articles, resulting from 6 (1 RCT, and 5 case series) prospective studies met the eligibility criteria and had data extracted. Quality assessment showed a medium methodological quality among the included trials (mean score: 13 ± 1; range: 12-14). In total, 291 short implants (lengths 5-8 mm; mean drop-out rate: 1.3%) were placed in 122 patients (90 females; mean age: 64.7 ± 10.8; range: 34-92 years old) supporting 23 fixed and 99 removable full-arch restorations. Post-loading follow-up period ranged from 12 to 120 months (33 ± 43 months). Fixed reconstructions showed mean radiographic marginal bone loss of 0.14 ± 0.08mm, whereas means FP, BCP and PCP were 1.5%, 0% and 53.3%, respectively. Removable full-arch restorations (overdentures) showed mean radiographic marginal bone loss of 0.06 ± 0.04mm, whereas means FP, BCP and PCP were 1.7%, 13.1% and 2.6%, respectively.
Conclusions and clinical implications
Full-arch restorations supported by short implants in atrophic edentulous mandibles seem to be a predictable treatment option in the short- and long-term, with minimal implant failure and biological complication proportions, regardless of the type of prosthesis. Nevertheless, the mean marginal bone loss and the proportion of prosthetic complications with fixed restorations were higher. The role of prosthetic parameters influenced by the addition of short implants remains unclear.
Background
The survival/ success rates of short implants on the rehabilitation of partially edentulous patients has been proved to be as high as those of longer implants. However, the actual role of short implants on the rehabilitation of totally edentulous patients with full-arch restorations remains unclear.
Aim/Hypothesis
To assess the Marginal Bone Loss (MBL), the Failure Proportions (FPs), and the Biological and Prosthetic Complication Proportions (BCPs/PCPs) of short (≤ 8-mm) implants supporting either fixed or removable full-arch restorations in the edentulous mandible and the risk factors for failures and/or complications.
Material and Methods
Two independent and calibrated reviewers performed a comprehensive electronic search at six databases, including gray literature. Handsearch through the references lists was also performed. Strict eligibility criteria were applied to studies throughout the 2-phases screening process. Contact with authors was attempted to clarify eligibility and collect missing data. Prospective studies assessing short (≤8-mm) dental implants, splinted or not to conventional implants, and supporting either fixed or removable full-arch restorations in the edentulous mandible, with at least 1-year post-loading follow-up, were included. The mean marginal bone loss (MBL), the proportion of implant failures and the proportion of complications of a biological or prosthetic nature were recorded, as well as the risk factors related to failures and/or complications. Quality assessment of the included papers was performed using a validated protocol.
Results
Electronic and hand-search yielded 14 and 8 studies, respectively, for phase 2 (full-text) screening. Eight articles, resulting from 6 (1 RCT, and 5 case series) prospective studies met the eligibility criteria and had data extracted. Quality assessment showed a medium methodological quality among the included trials (mean score: 13 ± 1; range: 12-14). In total, 291 short implants (lengths 5-8 mm; mean drop-out rate: 1.3%) were placed in 122 patients (90 females; mean age: 64.7 ± 10.8; range: 34-92 years old) supporting 23 fixed and 99 removable full-arch restorations. Post-loading follow-up period ranged from 12 to 120 months (33 ± 43 months). Fixed reconstructions showed mean radiographic marginal bone loss of 0.14 ± 0.08mm, whereas means FP, BCP and PCP were 1.5%, 0% and 53.3%, respectively. Removable full-arch restorations (overdentures) showed mean radiographic marginal bone loss of 0.06 ± 0.04mm, whereas means FP, BCP and PCP were 1.7%, 13.1% and 2.6%, respectively.
Conclusions and clinical implications
Full-arch restorations supported by short implants in atrophic edentulous mandibles seem to be a predictable treatment option in the short- and long-term, with minimal implant failure and biological complication proportions, regardless of the type of prosthesis. Nevertheless, the mean marginal bone loss and the proportion of prosthetic complications with fixed restorations were higher. The role of prosthetic parameters influenced by the addition of short implants remains unclear.
Background
The survival/ success rates of short implants on the rehabilitation of partially edentulous patients has been proved to be as high as those of longer implants. However, the actual role of short implants on the rehabilitation of totally edentulous patients with full-arch restorations remains unclear.
Aim/Hypothesis
To assess the Marginal Bone Loss (MBL), the Failure Proportions (FPs), and the Biological and Prosthetic Complication Proportions (BCPs/PCPs) of short (≤ 8-mm) implants supporting either fixed or removable full-arch restorations in the edentulous mandible and the risk factors for failures and/or complications.
Material and Methods
Two independent and calibrated reviewers performed a comprehensive electronic search at six databases, including gray literature. Handsearch through the references lists was also performed. Strict eligibility criteria were applied to studies throughout the 2-phases screening process. Contact with authors was attempted to clarify eligibility and collect missing data. Prospective studies assessing short (≤8-mm) dental implants, splinted or not to conventional implants, and supporting either fixed or removable full-arch restorations in the edentulous mandible, with at least 1-year post-loading follow-up, were included. The mean marginal bone loss (MBL), the proportion of implant failures and the proportion of complications of a biological or prosthetic nature were recorded, as well as the risk factors related to failures and/or complications. Quality assessment of the included papers was performed using a validated protocol.
Results
Electronic and hand-search yielded 14 and 8 studies, respectively, for phase 2 (full-text) screening. Eight articles, resulting from 6 (1 RCT, and 5 case series) prospective studies met the eligibility criteria and had data extracted. Quality assessment showed a medium methodological quality among the included trials (mean score: 13 ± 1; range: 12-14). In total, 291 short implants (lengths 5-8 mm; mean drop-out rate: 1.3%) were placed in 122 patients (90 females; mean age: 64.7 ± 10.8; range: 34-92 years old) supporting 23 fixed and 99 removable full-arch restorations. Post-loading follow-up period ranged from 12 to 120 months (33 ± 43 months). Fixed reconstructions showed mean radiographic marginal bone loss of 0.14 ± 0.08mm, whereas means FP, BCP and PCP were 1.5%, 0% and 53.3%, respectively. Removable full-arch restorations (overdentures) showed mean radiographic marginal bone loss of 0.06 ± 0.04mm, whereas means FP, BCP and PCP were 1.7%, 13.1% and 2.6%, respectively.
Conclusions and clinical implications
Full-arch restorations supported by short implants in atrophic edentulous mandibles seem to be a predictable treatment option in the short- and long-term, with minimal implant failure and biological complication proportions, regardless of the type of prosthesis. Nevertheless, the mean marginal bone loss and the proportion of prosthetic complications with fixed restorations were higher. The role of prosthetic parameters influenced by the addition of short implants remains unclear.