v. 2, n. 3, (2021)
Review

Short Dental Implants: State of the Art and Systematic Review

Marcelo Henrique Batista Santos
University Center North Paulista (Unorp) - Sao Jose do Rio Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Priscilla Janaína de Lima Borelli Bovo
University Center North Paulista (Unorp) - Sao Jose do Rio Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Henrique Esteves Magalhães
University Center North Paulista (Unorp) - Sao Jose do Rio Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Luciano Rodrigues Neves
University Center North Paulista (Unorp) - Sao Jose do Rio Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Elias Naim Kassis
University Center North Paulista (Unorp) - Sao Jose do Rio Preto, Sao Paulo, Brazil.

Published 2021-06-10

Keywords

  • Implants,
  • Short implants,
  • Osseointegration,
  • Atrophic bone,
  • Safety,
  • Efficiency
  • ...More
    Less

How to Cite

Batista Santos, M. H., Lima Borelli Bovo, P. J. de, Magalhães, H. E., Neves, L. R., & Kassis, E. N. (2021). Short Dental Implants: State of the Art and Systematic Review. MedNEXT Journal of Medical and Health Sciences, 2(3), 50–55. https://doi.org/10.34256/mdnt2138

Abstract

Introduction: The success of dental implants is due to their ability to osseointegrate, with direct contact of the implant surface with the bone, without the interposition of fibrous tissue. Because many patients do not receive implant treatments because they do not have adequate or sufficient bone height, the development of shorter implants could meet the needs of these patients. Objective: To carry out a brief systematic review to present the state of the art of using short implants. Methods: The present study followed a concise systematic review model. The search was carried out in the PubMed, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane Library, Web Of Science, and Scopus databases. The quality of the studies was based on the GRADE instrument and the risk of bias was analyzed according to the Cochrane instrument. Results: 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 their loss. Conclusion: The studies analyzed showed that short implants are a reliable, safe, and practical alternative to be used in situations with reduced bone height. They do not present bone loss or resorption over the years, nor the risk of fracture or any damage to patients, as long as they have an adequate design, correct technique, and meticulous planning.

References

  1. B.M. Vetromilla, T. Mazzetti, T. Pereira-Cenci, Short versus standard implants associated with sinus floor elevation: An umbrella review of meta-analyses of multiple outcomes, The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, S0022-3913 (2020) 30429-7.
  2. M. Cannata, T. Grandi, R. Samarani, L. Svezia, G. Grandi, A comparison of two implants with conical vs internal hex connections: 1-year post-loading results from a multicentre, randomised controlled trial, European Journal of Oral Implantology, 10 (2017) 161-168.
  3. I. Kovacic, S. Persic, J. Kranjcic, N. Lesic, A. Celebic, Rehabilitation of an Extremely Resorbed Edentulous Mandible by Short and Narrow Dental Implants, Case Reports in Dentistry, (2018).
  4. X. Xu, J. Huang, X. Fu, Y. Kuang, H. Yue, J. Song, L. Xu, Short implants versus longer implants in the posterior alveolar region after an observation period of at least five years: A systematic review and meta-analysis, J Dent. (2020) 100:103386.
  5. J. Lorenz, M. Blume, T. Korzinskas, S. Ghanaati, R.A. Sader, Short implants in the posterior maxilla to avoid sinus augmentation procedure: 5-year results from a retrospective cohort study, International Journal of Implant Dentistry, 5 (2019)3.
  6. Speratti, D. O uso de implantes curtos em reabilitações complexas. In: Sallum AW, et al.. Periodontologia e implantodontia, Soluções estéticas e recursos clínicos, Nova Odessa/SP: Napoleão, (2010).
  7. F.F.S.A. Galvão, A.A. Almeida-Júnior, N.B. Faria-Júnior, S.C.F.R. Caldas, J.M. dos Santos Nunes Reis, R. Margonar, Previsibilidade de implantes curtos: revisão de literature, Revista Sul-Brasileira De Odontologia, 8 (2011) 81-88.
  8. F.A. Souza, A.M. Aranega, D. Ponzoni, F. Benetti, B.B. Martins, J. Maciel, M.D.P.R. Sanchez, I.G. Garcia Júnior, Reabilitação protética de mandíbula atrófica por meio de implantes curtos. Relato de caso clínico com oito anos de acompanhamento, Implant News, 10 (2013) 441-446.
  9. W.L. Zhou, L.L. Li, X.R. Qiu, Q. An, M.H. Li, Effects of Combining Insulin-like Growth Factor 1 and Platelet-derived Growth Factor on Osteogenesis around Dental Implants, Chinese Journal of Dental Research, 20 (2017) 105-109.
  10. D. Moher, A. Liberati, J. Tetzlaff, D.G. Altman, The PRISMA Group Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement, PLOS Medicine, 6 (2009) e1000097.
  11. H. Balshem, M. Helfand, H.J. Schünemann, A. D. Oxman, R. Kunz, J. Brozek, G. E. Vist, Y. Falck-Ytter, J. Meerpohl, S. Norris, G. H. Guyatt, Grade guidelines: 3 ratng the quality of evidence, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64 (2011) 401-406.
  12. J. Higgins, S. Green, Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011], The Cochrane Collaboration, (2011).
  13. A. Torres-Alemany, L. Fernández-Estevan, R. Agustín-Panadero, J.M. Montiel-Company, C. Labaig-Rueda, J.F. Mañes-Ferrer, Clinical Behavior of Short Dental Implants: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis, Journal of Clinical Medicine, 9 (2020) 3271.
  14. D. Sheen, L. Nikoyan, Placement of Short Implants: A Viable Alternative?, Dental Clinics of North America, 65 (2021) 21-31.
  15. S. Annibali, M.P. Cristalli, D. Dell'Aquila, I. Bignozzi, G. La Monaca, A. Pilloni Short dental implants: a systematic review, Journal of Dental Research, 91 (2012) 25-32.
  16. Rameh S, Menhall A, Younes R. Key factors influencing short implant success, Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 24 (2020) 263-275.
  17. O. Doganay, E. Kilic, Comparative Finite Element Analysis of Short Implants with Different Treatment Approaches in the Atrophic Mandible, International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants, 35 (2020) e69-e76.
  18. P. Papaspyridakos, A. De Souza, K. Vazouras, H. Gholami, S. Pagni, H.P. Weber, Survival rates of short dental implants (≤6 mm) compared with implants longer than 6 mm in posterior jaw areas: A meta-analysis, Clinical Oral Implants Research, 29 Suppl 16 (2018) 8-20.
  19. F. A. Souza, A. M. Aranega, D. Ponzoni, F. Benetti, B.B. Martins, J. Maciel, M.D.P.R. Sanchez, I. G. Garcia Júnior, Reabilitação protética de mandíbula atrófica por meio de implantes curtos. Relato de caso clínico com oito anos de acompanhamento, Implant News, 10 (2013) 441-446.
  20. A. Monje, H.L. Chan, J.H. Fu, F. Suarez, et al. Are short dental implants (<10mm) effective? A meta-analysis on prospective clinical trials, Journal of Periodontology, 84 (2013) 895-904.
  21. S.H. Chang, C.L. Lin, S.S. Hsue, Y. S. Lin, S.R. Huang, Biomechanical analysis of the effects of implant diameter and bone quality in short implants placed in the atrophic posterior maxilla, Medical Engineering and Physics, 34 (2012) 153-160.
  22. C. Mertens, A.M. Baumer, H. Kappel, J. Hoffmann, H. G. Steveling, Use of 8-mm and 9-mm implants in atrophic alveolar ridges: 10-year results, The International journal of oral and maxillofacial implants, 27 (2012) 1501-1508.