Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
AIM: To evaluate the long-term clinical results of short implants in the posterior areas and analyse the possible influence of different variables on implant success rate and marginal bone loss (MBL). METHODS: A retrospective study design was used. Patients were included if they had received one or more short implants (≤8.5 mm long) in the posterior jaws at least 10 years earlier. All implants were embedded in plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF). The cumulative success rate was the primary outcome. MBL and the influence of different variables as secondary outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 111 short implants (7.0, 7.5 and 8.5 mm in length) placed in 75 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of which, 94 were splinted to longer ones. The mean follow-up was 123.3 months (SD = 10.4 months). The mean crown-implant ratio was 1.4 (SD = 0.3). The mean MBL was 1.0 mm at mesial (SD = 0.7) and 0.9 mm (SD = 0.6) at distal aspect. One short implant failed. Success rate was 98.9% and 98.2% for the implant and patient-based analysis respectively. No relationship was observed between the studied variables and the MBL. CONCLUSIONS: These clinical results support the use of short implants as an effective and safe long-term treatment option.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Anitua et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: