The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A retrospective clinical study of single short implants (less than 8 mm) in posterior edentulous areas

  • Kim, Sang-Yun (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Ku, Jeong-Kui (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Hyun-Suk (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Yun, Pil-Young (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Young-Kyun (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Section of Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital)
  • Received : 2017.05.27
  • Accepted : 2018.02.27
  • Published : 2018.06.29
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. The goal of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcome of single short implants, less than 8 mm in length, placed in the posterior area. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A total of 128 patients (75 male and 53 female, mean age: $52.6{\pm}11.2years$) with 154 implants participated. Implant marginal bone loss, and survival and success rates were measured. RESULTS. The mean follow-up period was $51.35{\pm}24.97months$. A total of 128 implants, 8 mm in length, were placed in patients who had mean marginal bone loss of 0.75 mm. These implants had a survival rate of 95.3%. Twenty-six implants, 7 mm in length, were placed in areas with a mean marginal bone loss of 0.78 mm and had a survival rate of 96.2%. Both marginal bone loss and survival rate were not statistically different among the groups. In the maxilla, 34 implants showed a mean marginal bone loss of 0.77 mm and a survival rate of 97.1%. In the mandible, 120 implants showed a mean marginal bone loss of 0.75 mm and a survival rate of 95.0%. The average marginal bone loss around all implants was $0.76{\pm}0.27mm$ at the last follow-up review after functional loading. The survival rate was 95.6% and success rate was 93.5%. CONCLUSION. In our study, single short implants less than 8 mm in length in the posterior areas had favorable clinical outcomes.

Keywords

References

  1. Misch CE, Suzuki JB, Misch-Dietsh FM, Bidez MW. A positive correlation between occlusal trauma and peri-implant bone loss: literature support. Implant Dent 2005;14:108-16. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.id.0000165033.34294.db
  2. Rocci A, Martignoni M, Gottlow J. Immediate loading of Branemark System TiUnite and machined-surface implants in the posterior mandible: a randomized open-ended clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003;5:57-63.
  3. Glauser R, Lundgren AK, Gottlow J, Sennerby L, Portmann M, Ruhstaller P, Hammerle CH. Immediate occlusal loading of Branemark TiUnite implants placed predominantly in soft bone: 1-year results of a prospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003;5:47-56.
  4. Sun HL, Huang C, Wu YR, Shi B. Failure rates of short (${\leq}$ 10 mm) dental implants and factors influencing their failure: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011;26:816-25.
  5. Gentile MA, Chuang SK, Dodson TB. Survival estimates and risk factors for failure with 6 $\times$ 5.7-mm implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005;20:930-7.
  6. Chan MF, Närhi TO, de Baat C, Kalk W. Treatment of the atrophic edentulous maxilla with implant-supported overdentures: a review of the literature. Int J Prosthodont. 1998;11:7- 15.
  7. Misch CE. Short dental implants: a literature review and rationale for use. Dent Today 2005;24:64-6,68.
  8. Balshi TJ, Wolfinger GJ, Slauch RW, Balshi SF. A retrospective analysis of 800 Branemark System implants following the $All-on-Four^{TM}$ protocol. J Prosthodont. 2014;23:83-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12089
  9. Annibali S, Cristalli MP, Dell'Aquila D, Bignozzi I, La Monaca G, Pilloni A. Short dental implants: a systematic review. J Dent Res 2012;91:25-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034511425675
  10. Mendonça JA, Francischone CE, Senna PM, Matos de Oliveira AE, Sotto-Maior BS. A retrospective evaluation of the survival rates of splinted and non-splinted short dental implants in posterior partially edentulous jaws. J Periodontol 2014;85:787-94. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2013.130193
  11. Antoun H, Cherfane P, Sojod B. Consecutive Case Series of Healed Single-Molar Sites Immediately Restored with Wide- Diameter Implants: A 1-Year Evaluation. Int J Dent 2016; 2016:5645892.
  12. Calandriello R, Tomatis M. Immediate occlusal loading of single lower molars using Branemark $System^{(R)}$ Wide Platform $TiUnite^{TM}$ implants: a 5-year follow-up report of a prospective clinical multicenter study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2011;13:311-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00214.x
  13. Fugazzotto PA, Vlassis J, Butler B. ITI implant use in private practice: Clinical results with 5,526 implants followed up to 72+ months in function. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:408-12.
  14. Malmstrom H, Gupta B, Ghanem A, Cacciato R, Ren Y, Romanos GE. Success rate of short dental implants supporting single crowns and fixed bridges. Clin Oral Implants Res 2016;27:1093-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12693
  15. Albrektsson T, Zarb G, Worthington P, Eriksson AR. The long-term efficacy of currently used dental implants: a review and proposed criteria of success. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986;1:11-25.
  16. Zarb GA, Albrektsson T. Consensus report: towards optimized treatment outcomes for dental implants. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:641. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70048-4
  17. Herrmann I, Lekholm U, Holm S, Kultje C. Evaluation of patient and implant characteristics as potential prognostic factors for oral implant failures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005;20:220-30.
  18. Weng D, Jacobson Z, Tarnow D, Hürzeler MB, Faehn O, Sanavi F, Barkvoll P, Stach RM. A prospective multicenter clinical trial of 3i machined-surface implants: results after 6 years of follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18: 417-23.
  19. Telleman G, Raghoebar GM, Vissink A, den Hartog L, Huddleston Slater JJ, Meijer HJ. A systematic review of the prognosis of short (<10 mm) dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient. J Clin Periodontol 2011;38:667- 76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011.01736.x
  20. Romeo E, Ghisolfi M, Rozza R, Chiapasco M, Lops D. Short (8-mm) dental implants in the rehabilitation of partial and complete edentulism: a 3- to 14-year longitudinal study. Int J Prosthodont 2006;19:586-92.
  21. Maló P, de Araújo Nobre M, Rangert B. Short implants placed one-stage in maxillae and mandibles: a retrospective clinical study with 1 to 9 years of follow-up. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2007;9:15-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2006.00027.x
  22. Kim YK, Kim SG, Yun PY, Hwang JW, Son MK. Prognosis of single molar implants: a retrospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2010;30:401-7.
  23. Kim YK, Ahn KJ, Yun PY. A retrospective study on the prognosis of single implant placed at the sinus bone graft site. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2014;118:181-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oooo.2013.05.011
  24. Isidor F. Clinical probing and radiographic assessment in relation to the histologic bone level at oral implants in monkeys. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:255-64. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1997.080402.x
  25. Yilmaz B, Seidt JD, McGlumphy EA, Clelland NL. Comparison of strains for splinted and nonsplinted screw-retained prostheses on short implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011; 26:1176-82.

Cited by

  1. A micromorphological/microbiological pilot study assessing three methods for the maintenance of the implant patient vol.7, pp.2, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.345