1-Year Post-loading of Short and Ultrashort Implants in Posterior Mandibular and Maxillary Regions

Authors

  • Noha M. ElAdl Department of Surgery and Oral Medicine, National Research Centre, Cairo, Egypt
  • Hisham M. Sholkamy Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
  • Aala'a S. Emara Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2021.7237

Keywords:

Dental implants, Short, Ultra-short, Posterior ridge

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Short implants have been proposed as an option for management of deficient alveolar ridges without the need for complex augmentation procedures.

AIM: In this study, we aim to assess the use of short and ultrashort implants for the management of deficient alveolar ridges in posterior mandibular and maxillary areas with a 1-year post-loading follow-up.

METHODOLOGY: Ten patients were recruited in this trial with a total of 14 implants to be placed. The patients all needed implants in the maxillary/mandibular posterior regions for prosthetic rehabilitation with deficient alveolar ridge heights. Implants of 5 mm diameter and lengths either 6 or 8.5 mm were to be placed in the edentulous spaces after proper radiographic assessment. Two-stage surgeries were followed with ¾ months between implant placement and loading. The follow-up lasted for a year to allow for peri-implant clinical assessment and radiographic analysis.

RESULTS: All patients showed uneventful healing and no infection, wound dehiscence or inflammation was noted. Prosthetic rehabilitation was successful and satisfactory to the patients. None of the cases showed excessive marginal bone loss and stability was maintained at acceptable levels to the end of the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, short and ultrashort implants seem like a valid option for management of posterior edentulous regions with deficient ridge heights.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block

References

Ostman PO. Immediate/early loading of dental implants. Clinical documentation and presentation of a treatment concept. Periodontol 2000. 2008;47:90-112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0757.2007.00244.x PMid:18412576 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0757.2007.00244.x

Quirynen M, Naert I, van Steenberghe D. Fixture design and overload influence marginal bone loss and fixture success in the Brånemark system. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1992;3(3):104-11. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1992.030302.x PMid:1290790 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1992.030302.x

Sennerby L, Roos J. Surgical determinants of clinical success of osseointegrated oral implants: A review of the literature. Int J Prosthodont. 1998;11(5):408-20. PMid:9922733

Schliephake H, Neukam FW, Wichmann M. Survival analysis of endosseous implants in bone grafts used for the treatment of severe alveolar ridge atrophy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1997;55(11):1227-33; discussion 1233-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0278-2391(97)90173-7 PMid:9371112 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(97)90173-7

Bell RB, Blakey GH, White RP, Hillebrand DG, Molina A. Staged reconstruction of the severely atrophic mandible with autogenous bone graft and endosteal implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2002;60(10):1135-41. https://doi.org/10.1053/joms.2002.34986 PMid:12378486 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1053/joms.2002.34986

Kahnberg KE, Nilsson P, Rasmusson L. Le Fort I osteotomy with interpositional bone grafts and implants for rehabilitation of the severely resorbed maxilla: A 2-stage procedure. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999;14(4):571-8. PMid:10453674

Smedberg JI, Johansson P, Ekenbäck D, Wannfors D. Implants and sinus-inlay graft in a 1-stage procedure in severely atrophied maxillae: Prosthodontic aspects in a 3-year follow-up study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2001;16(5):668-74. PMid:11669249

Gentile MA, Chuang SK, Dodson TB. Survival estimates and risk factors for failure with 6 x 5.7-mm implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2005;20(6):930-7. PMid:16392351

Lekholm U. The branemark implant technique. A standardized procedure under continuous development. In: Tissue Integration in Oral, Orthopedic and Maxillofacial Reconstruction. United States: Quintessence Publishing Co. Inc.; 1992. p. 194-9.

Adell R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U, Brånemark PI, Jemt T. Long-term follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1990;5(4):347-59. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1993.040404.x PMid:2094653 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1993.040404.x

Jemt T, Lekholm U, Adell R. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of partially edentulous patients: A preliminary study on 876 consecutively placed fixtures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1989;4(3):211-7. PMid:2700745

van Steenberghe D, Lekholm U, Bolender C, Folmer T, Henry P, Herrmann I, et al. Applicability of osseointegrated oral implants in the rehabilitation of partial edentulism: A prospective multicenter study on 558 fixtures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1990;5(3):272-81. PMid:2098330

Nevins M, Langer B. The successful application of osseointegrated implants to the posterior jaw: A long-term retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1993;8(4):428-32. PMid:8270312

Renouard F, Arnoux JP, Sarment DP. Five-mm-diameter implants without a smooth surface collar: Report on 98 consecutive placements. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999;14(1):101-7. PMid:10074759

Langer B, Langer L, Herrmann I, Jorneus L. The wide fixture: A solution for special bone situations and a rescue for the compromised implant. Part 1. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1993;8(4):400-8. PMid:8270308

Davies JE. Mechanisms of endosseous integration. Int J Prosthodont. 1998;11(5):391-401. PMid:9922731

Ravidà A, Barootchi S, Askar H, Suárez-López Del Amo F, Tavelli L, et al. Long-term effectiveness of extra-short (≤6 mm) dental implants: A systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019;34(1):68-84. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.6893 PMid:30695086 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.6893

Yanes CP, Mesegué MD, López JL, Obispo CA, Roig AM. Short dental implants in atrophic jaws rehabilitation. Update. Avances Periodoncia Implantol Oral. 2017;29:23-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.piro.2015.10.003

Papaspyridakos P, Souza A, Vzouras K, Gholami H, Pagni S, Weber PH. Survival rates of short dental implants (≤6 mm) compared with longer than 6 mm in posterior jaws areas: A meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implant Res. 2018;29 Suppl 16:8-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13289 PMid:30328206 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13289

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 Implant Res. 2016;27(9):1093-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12693 PMid:26391214 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12693

Tabrizi R, Arabion H, Aliabadi E, Hasanzadeh F. Does increasing the number of short implants reduce marginal bone loss in the posterior mandible? A prospective study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;54(7):731-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2016.04.010 PMid:27131984 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2016.04.010

Sierra-Sánchez JL, García-Sala-Bonmatí F, Martínez- González A, García-Dalmau C, Mañes-Ferrer JF, Brotons-Oliver A. Predictability of short implants (< 10 mm) as a treatment option for the rehabilitation of atrophic maxillae. A systematic review. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2016;21(3):e392-402. https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.20949 PMid:26946199 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.20949

Slotte C, Grønningsaeter A, Halmøy AM. Four-millimeter implants supporting fixed partial dental prostheses in the severely resorbed posterior mandible: Two-year results. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012;14 A Suppl 1:e46-58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00346.x PMid:21599827 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00346.x

Loyola-González P, Torassa D, Domínguez A. Comparative study on the behaviour and tension distribution in short and standard dental implants in the back of the upper jaw. Rev Clin Periodoncia Implantol Rehabil Oral. 2016;9:36-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.piro.2015.10.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.piro.2015.10.003

Anitua E, Piñas L, Begoña L, Orive G. Long-term retrospective evaluation of short implants in the posterior areas: Clinical results after 10-12 years. J Clin Periodontol. 2014;41(4):404-11. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12222 PMid:24354567 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12222

Downloads

Published

2021-11-10

How to Cite

1.
ElAdl NM, Sholkamy HM, Emara AS. 1-Year Post-loading of Short and Ultrashort Implants in Posterior Mandibular and Maxillary Regions. Open Access Maced J Med Sci [Internet]. 2021 Nov. 10 [cited 2024 Apr. 23];9(D):264-9. Available from: https://oamjms.eu/index.php/mjms/article/view/7237