IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i11p5683-d562344.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Guillermo Pardo-Zamora

    (Department of General Dentistry and Implants, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Murcia, 30008 Murcia, Spain)

  • Antonio José Ortiz-Ruíz

    (Department of General Dentistry and Implants, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Murcia, 30008 Murcia, Spain)

  • Fabio Camacho-Alonso

    (Department of General Dentistry and Implants, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Murcia, 30008 Murcia, Spain)

  • José Francisco Martínez-Marco

    (Department of General Dentistry and Implants, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Murcia, 30008 Murcia, Spain)

  • Juan Manuel Molina-González

    (Department of General Dentistry and Implants, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Murcia, 30008 Murcia, Spain)

  • Núria Piqué-Clusella

    (Microbiology Section, Department of Biology, Healthcare and Environment, Faculty of Pharmacy and Food Sciences, Universitat de Barcelona (UB), Av Joan XXIII, 27-31, 08028 Barcelona, Spain)

  • Ascensión Vicente-Hernández

    (Department of General Dentistry and Implants, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Murcia, 30008 Murcia, Spain)

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Guillermo Pardo-Zamora & Antonio José Ortiz-Ruíz & Fabio Camacho-Alonso & José Francisco Martínez-Marco & Juan Manuel Molina-González & Núria Piqué-Clusella & Ascensión Vicente-Hernández, 2021. "Short Dental Implants (≤8.5 mm) versus Standard Dental Implants (≥10 mm): A One-Year Post-Loading Prospective Observational Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-15, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:11:p:5683-:d:562344
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/11/5683/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/11/5683/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:11:p:5683-:d:562344. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.