Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Observational Study
. 2021 May 26;18(11):5683.
doi: 10.3390/ijerph18115683.

Short Dental Implants (≤8.5 mm) versus Standard Dental Implants (≥10 mm): A One-Year Post-Loading Prospective Observational Study

Guillermo Pardo-Zamora  1 , Antonio José Ortiz-Ruíz  1 , Fabio Camacho-Alonso  1 , José Francisco Martínez-Marco  1 , Juan Manuel Molina-González  1 , Núria Piqué-Clusella  2 , Ascensión Vicente-Hernández  1
Affiliations
Observational Study

Short Dental Implants (≤8.5 mm) versus Standard Dental Implants (≥10 mm): A One-Year Post-Loading Prospective Observational Study

Guillermo Pardo-Zamora et al. Int J Environ Res Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: Recent data have shown that short dental implants can be the preferred treatment in most of cases of posterior atrophic alveolar ridges, offering higher survival and lower complication rates than long implants. The survival rates, stability, and marginal bone level changes were compared between short implants (7 and 8.5 mm) and standard-length implants (≥10 mm).

Methods: Prospective observational study in which adult patients requiring ≥1 osseointegrated implants to replace missing teeth were recruited consecutively. A clinical examination was performed on the day the definitive prosthesis was placed and after 6 and 12 months. Implant stability quotient (ISQ), marginal bone level (MBL) changes, and the correlation between these parameters and the characteristics of the implants were evaluated.

Results: A total of 99 implants were inserted (47 short, 52 standard) in 74 patients. The 12-month survival rate was 100%. ISQ values showed a similar pattern for both types of implants. No correlation was found between ISQ changes after one year and MBL values, nor between the latter and the characteristics of the implants.

Conclusions: With clinical treatment criteria, shorter implants (7 and 8.5 mm in length) can be just as useful as standard-length implants in atrophic alveolar ridges, demonstrating similar rates of survival, stability, and crestal bone loss.

Keywords: dental implants; implant stability; marginal bone level; partial edentulism; short implants; standard implants; survival.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Clinical photographs and X-rays belonging to the short implants patient group (7 and 8.5 mm). Photographs taken during the surgery procedure of a 7 mm implant being placed (a–d), standardized periapical X-ray and implant stability quotient (ISQ) value measurement immediately after the implant placement (e,f), standardized periapical X-ray and ISQ value measurement day the definite prosthesis was loaded (g,h), Clinical photograph and standardized periapical X-ray 12 months follow-up (i,j).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Changes in mean ISQ values of patients with standard implants (≥10 mm) and short implants (7 and 8.5 mm).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Average marginal bone levels (mm) in patients with standard implants (≥10 mm) and short implants (7 and 8.5 mm).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Yan Q., Wu X., Su M., Hua F., Shi B. Short implants (≤6 mm) versus longer implants with sinus floor elevation in atrophic posterior maxilla: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e029826. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029826. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Atieh M., Zadeh H., Stanford C.M., Cooper L.F. Survival of short dental implants for treatment of posterior partial edentulism: A systematic review. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implant. 2012;27:1323–1331. - PubMed
    1. Buser D., Mericske-Stern R., Bernard J.P.P., Behneke A., Behneke N., Hirt H.P., Belser U.C., Lang N.P. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin. Oral Implant. Res. 1997;8:161–172. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080302.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Telleman G., Raghoebar G.M., Vissink A., den Hartog L., Huddleston Slater J.J.R., Meijer H.J.A. A systematic review of the prognosis of short (<10 mm) dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient: Systematic review of short dental implants. J. Clin. Periodontol. 2011;38:667–676. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01736.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ravidà A., Barootchi S., Askar H., Del Amo F.S.-L., Tavelli L., Wang H.-L. Long-term effectiveness of extra-short (≤6 mm) dental implants: A systematic review. [(accessed on 4 May 2021)];Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implant. 2019 34:68–84. doi: 10.11607/jomi.6893. Available online: http://quintpub.com/journals/omi/abstract.php?iss2_id=1584&article_id=19107. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Substances