Short dental implants (6 mm) versus long dental implants (11–15 mm) in combination with sinus floor elevation procedures: 3‐year results from a multicentre, randomized, controlled clinical trial. (6th March 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Pohl, Veronika; Thoma, Daniel S.; Sporniak‐Tutak, Katarzyna; Garcia‐Garcia, Abel; Taylor, Thomas D.; Haas, Robert; Hämmerle, Christoph H. F.
• Is Part Of: Journal of clinical periodontology. Volume 44:Number 4(2017:Apr.)
• Page Start: 438
• Page End: 445
• Publication Date: 2017-03-06
• Subjects: dental implant -- multicentre -- posterior maxilla -- randomized controlled clinical trial -- short dental implant -- single unit -- sinus floor elevation -- sinus grafting; Periodontics -- Periodicals; 617.6
• DOI: 10.1111/jcpe.12694
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0303-6979

Abstract

Abstract: Aim: To test whether the use of short dental implants (6 mm) results in an implant survival rate similar to that with longer implants (11–15 mm) in combination with sinus grafting. Methods: This multicentre study enrolled 101 patients with partial edentulism in the posterior maxilla and a remaining bone height of 5–7 mm. Included patients were randomly assigned to receive short implants (6 mm; GS/group short) or long implants (11–15 mm) simultaneously with sinus grafting (GG/group graft). Six months after implant placement (IP), implants were loaded with single crowns (PR) and patients were re‐examined yearly thereafter. Assessed outcomes included: implant survival, marginal bone level changes (MBL), probing pocket depth (PPD), bleeding on probing (BoP) and plaque accumulation (PCR) during 3 years of loading as well as recording of any adverse effects. In addition to descriptive statistics, statistical analysis has been performed for the two treatment modalities using a non‐parametric approach. Results: In 101 patients, 137 implants were placed. At the 3‐year follow‐up (FU‐3), 94 patients with 129 implants were re‐examined. The implant survival rate was 100% in both groups. MBL at FU‐3 was 0.45 mm (GG) and 0.44 mm (GS) ( p > 0.05). A statistically significant loss of MBL was observed in both GG (−0.43 ± 0.58 mm) and GS (−0.44 ± 0.56 mm) from IP to FU‐3, and from PR to FU‐3 in GG (−0.25 ± 0.58 mm) but not in GS (−0.1 ± 0.54 mm). PCR and BoP at FU‐3 did not show any difference between the groups but for PPD ( p = 0.035). Conclusions: Within the limitations of this study, implants with a length of 6 mm as well as longer implants in combination with a lateral sinus lift may be considered as a treatment option provided a residual ridge height of 5–7 mm in the atrophied posterior maxilla is present.