Dentistry and Dental Materials

Osseo-integrated implants have become a routine solution for treating edentulous patients. Dental implants have a favorable long-term prognosis when compared to conventional fixed prosthodontics. The implant length is usually considered during the treatment planning and the length is decided based upon the existing bone. After teeth extraction the jaw bone volume is lost creating a real challenge to place implants with adequate length. Moreover and subsequent to poor bone volume; implant placement become risky as we have some important anatomical structures such as the nasal cavity, maxillary sinus mental nerve, mandibular nerve and lingual vascular bundle. There are many surgical procedures to compensate for bone deficiency, such as sinus and/or ridge augmentation procedures. They are proven to be successful in providing sufficient bone quantity and quality for implant placement and prosthetic support; however, increased cost, surgical time, morbidity, and healing time are often associated with these procedures. Hence implants with alternative length and diameter were introduced in response to clinical demands. In the last decade, use of short implants has become a growing interest among clinicians. Encouraging survival rates have been reported over time. Recent systematic reviews indicated that short implants have the same survival rates and degree of marginal bone loss as longer implants. Short implants bio-compatibly transfers occlusal forces from abutment to surrounding bone. The entire design of short implant optimizes the effectiveness of each of the features within the available implants surface area and length. Short dental implants could be a reliable and predictable alternative solution for those cases with less than optimal ridge bone volume. This lecture focuses of both clinical and biological aspects of short implants in our routine clinical practice.

Recent Publications

1. Annibali S, Cristalli MP, Dell Aquila D, Bignozzi I, La Monaca G and Pilloni A(2012) Short dental implants: a systematic review. Journal of Dental Research 91(1):25-32.

2. Pommer B, Frantal S, Willer J, Posch M, Watzek G and Tepper G(2011) Impact of dental implant length on early failure rates: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Journal of Clinical Periodontolgy  38(9):856-863.

3. Abuhussein H, Pagni G, Rebaudi A and Wang H-L (2010) The effect of thread pattern upon implant osseointegration. Clinical Oral Implant Research 21(2): 129-136.

4. Arlin ML (2006) Short dental implants as a treatment option: results from an observational study in a single private practice.  The International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 21:769-776.

5. Ten Bruggenkate C M, Asikainen P, Foitzik C, Krekeler G and Sutter F (1998) Short (6-mm) non submerged dental implants: results of a multicenter clinical trial of 1 to 7 years. The International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 13(6): 791-798.