Purpose: To compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of <7 mm short (SH) implants inserted in native bone vs longer (ST) implants placed in vertically augmented partially edentulous posterior jaws. A further aim was to evaluate if the residual bone dimension plays a role in the outcomes of SH and extra-SH implants. Materials and Methods: This review was registered with PROSPERO. An electronic literature search was performed on PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with at least 1-year follow-up, comparing fixed prostheses supported by SH vs ST implants in augmented sites were included. Marginal bone level (MBL) changes, implant survival rate, and complications were evaluated through a meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis was performed dividing the SH implants according to length at each follow-up (1-, 3-, 5-year of function). Results: Twenty-five articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria, featuring a total of 650 SH implants placed in 415 patients and 685 ST implants placed in 403 patients. There was a trend for a significantly lower MBL associated with SH implants respect to ST implants at each follow-up, whilst there was no evidence of a difference in failure rates between SH and ST implants, for any SH length considered and at any follow-up. There was evidence for a lower incidence of complications in favor of SH implants at both 1-year (P <.0001) and 3-year follow-up (P =.01), while at 5-year follow-up there was no evidence of a difference between SH and ST groups (P =.30). Conclusion: SH implants supporting partial fixed rehabilitations represent a valuable alternative to augmentation procedures in the medium term. While the performance of implants at least 5-mm long is well documented, more studies with at least 5-year follow-up are needed to confirm the promising outcomes observed with <5 mm-long fixtures.
Are <7-mm long implants in native bone as effective as longer implants in augmented bone for the rehabilitation of posterior atrophic jaws? A systematic review and meta-analysis / G. Iezzi, V. Perrotti, P. Felice, C. Barausse, A. Piattelli, M. Del Fabbro. - In: CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH. - ISSN 1523-0899. - 22:5(2020), pp. 552-566. [10.1111/cid.12946]
Are <7-mm long implants in native bone as effective as longer implants in augmented bone for the rehabilitation of posterior atrophic jaws? A systematic review and meta-analysis
M. Del Fabbro
Ultimo
2020
Abstract
Purpose: To compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of <7 mm short (SH) implants inserted in native bone vs longer (ST) implants placed in vertically augmented partially edentulous posterior jaws. A further aim was to evaluate if the residual bone dimension plays a role in the outcomes of SH and extra-SH implants. Materials and Methods: This review was registered with PROSPERO. An electronic literature search was performed on PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with at least 1-year follow-up, comparing fixed prostheses supported by SH vs ST implants in augmented sites were included. Marginal bone level (MBL) changes, implant survival rate, and complications were evaluated through a meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis was performed dividing the SH implants according to length at each follow-up (1-, 3-, 5-year of function). Results: Twenty-five articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria, featuring a total of 650 SH implants placed in 415 patients and 685 ST implants placed in 403 patients. There was a trend for a significantly lower MBL associated with SH implants respect to ST implants at each follow-up, whilst there was no evidence of a difference in failure rates between SH and ST implants, for any SH length considered and at any follow-up. There was evidence for a lower incidence of complications in favor of SH implants at both 1-year (P <.0001) and 3-year follow-up (P =.01), while at 5-year follow-up there was no evidence of a difference between SH and ST groups (P =.30). Conclusion: SH implants supporting partial fixed rehabilitations represent a valuable alternative to augmentation procedures in the medium term. While the performance of implants at least 5-mm long is well documented, more studies with at least 5-year follow-up are needed to confirm the promising outcomes observed with <5 mm-long fixtures.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
CIDRR 2020 Iezzi short implants-proofs.pdf
Open Access dal 02/10/2021
Tipologia:
Post-print, accepted manuscript ecc. (versione accettata dall'editore)
Dimensione
1.49 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.49 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
cid.12946.pdf
accesso riservato
Tipologia:
Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione
1.43 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.43 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.