DIMEC

Lack of standard criteria in the outcome assessment makes it difficult to draw conclusions on the clinical performance of short implants and, under these circumstances, determine the reasons for implant failure. This study evaluated, through a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis, the essential parameters required to assess the long-term clinical performance of short and extra-short implants. Electronic databases (Pubmed-MEDLINE, Cochrane Library Database, Embase, and Lilacs) were searched by two independent reviewers, without language limitation, to identify eligible papers. References from the selected articles were also reviewed. The review included clinical trials involving short dental implants placed in humans, published between January 2000 and March 2014, which described the parameters applied for outcome's measurements and provided data on survival rates. Thirteen methodologically acceptable studies were selected and 24 parameters were identified. The most frequent parameters assessed were the marginal bone loss and the cumulative implant survival rate, followed by implant failure rate and biological complications such as bleeding on probing and probing pocket depths. Only cumulative implant survival rate data allows meta-analysis revealing a positive effect size (from 0.052 (fixed) to 0.042 (random)), which means that short implant appears to be a successful treatment option. Mechanical complications and crown-to-implant (C/I) ratio measurement were also commonly described, however, considering the available evidence; no strong conclusions could be drawn since different methods were used to assess each parameter. By means of this literature review, a standard evaluation scheme is proposed, being helpful to regiment further investigations and comparisons on future studies.

Objective: The purpose of this work is to determine the surface morphology obtained by sandblasting and double treatment with acids of titanium implants (BioActive Treatment, B&B Dental Implant Company S.r.l., Bologna, Italy). Method: Implant surfaces are sandblasted with alumina oxide (Al₂0₃) by using a dedicated appliance. The surface is treated with a double etching by using mineral acids (phosphoric acid). Implant surfaces are cleaned with Argon plasma in a class 10.000 clean room, to guarantee the absence of environmental contamination. As an efficacy test, surfaces undergo x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS or ESCA). The surface topography of the implants was evaluated by Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM). Roughness was evaluated quantitatively using dedicated software to convert conventional SEM images into three-dimensional data (Mex 4.2, Alicona Imaging GmbH, Graz, Austria). EDX (Energy Dispersive X-ray spectroscopy) analysis was performed. Result: The SEM observation s...

Objectives: The object of this work is to evaluate the importance of crown-to-implant ratio, created using a short implant and a long abutment, on crestal bone loss, and prosthetic complications. Methods: In this study short implants were used (6 and 8 mm in length), with a biological Equator Profile abutment (> 5mm in height), supporting a fixed denture. All subjects were followed for 3 years. Radiographic and clinical examinations were performed. 15 patients (mean age, 59 ± 10 years) with 20 short implants were included in this study. All the prosthesis were opposed to fixed prosthesis or natural teeth. Results: One implant was lost due to peri-implantitis. The mean crown-to-implant ratio was 2.5 (range, 1.5 to 3.75). No prosthetic failure occurred. Average bone loss was 0.69 ± 0.50 mm in the first year of follow up and 1,01 ± 0.3 at the end of the third year of follow up.

In the past, short implants were commonly associated with lower survival rates due to the reduced bone-to-implant contact allied to the fact that short implants are mostly installed in the posterior zone, once the quality of the alveolar bone is relatively poor. • On the other hand, recent literature has demonstrated no significant differences in the survival rate reported by short and standard implants probably due to the development of modified implant designs and surfaces. • Nevertheless, standard outcome criteria to assess the clinical performance of the short implants are still missing in literature, becoming difficult to draw conclusions. Background: Lack of standard criteria in the outcome assessment makes it difficult to draw conclusions on the clinical performance of short implants and, under these circumstances, determine the reasons for implant failure. Aims: This study evaluated, through a systematic review of the literature, the essential parameters required to assess t...

Objectives: The purpose of this work is to determine the effect of crown height space on implant survival, crestal bone loss, and prosthetic complications. Methods: Short implants (6 and 8 mm), with a biological Equator Profile abutment, supporting a fixed denture in the posterior mandible and followed for at least 12 months were analyzed. Radiographic and clinical examinations were performed. 20 patients (mean age, 64 ± 10 years) with 39 short implants were included in this study. Patients were followed for up to 2 years (mean, 1,5 years). Results: No implants were lost. Mean crown height space was 18.20 ± 2.75 mm, and 61% of the implants had a crown height space in the range of 15 to 20 mm. The type of antagonist significantly affected marginal bone loss around short implants: bone loss was lower for implants opposing a natural dentition (mean, 0.69 ± 0.50 mm) or a complete denture (mean, 0.79 ± 0.50 mm). A significant positive correlation was found only between bone loss and crow...

Lack of standard criteria in the outcome assessment makes it difficult to draw conclusions on the clinical performance of short implants and, under these circumstances, determine the reasons for implant failure. This study evaluated, through a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis, the essential parameters required to assess the long-term clinical performance of short and extra-short implants. Electronic databases (Pubmed-MEDLINE, Cochrane Library Database, Embase, and Lilacs) were searched by two independent reviewers, without language limitation, to identify eligible papers. References from the selected articles were also reviewed. The review included clinical trials involving short dental implants placed in humans, published between January 2000 and March 2014, which described the parameters applied for outcome's measurements and provided data on survival rates. Thirteen methodologically acceptable studies were selected and 24 parameters were identified. The most frequent parameters assessed were the marginal bone loss and the cumulative implant survival rate, followed by implant failure rate and biological complications such as bleeding on probing and probing pocket depths. Only cumulative implant survival rate data allows meta-analysis revealing a positive effect size (from 0.052 (fixed) to 0.042 (random)), which means that short implant appears to be a successful treatment option. Mechanical complications and crown-to-implant (C/I) ratio measurement were also commonly described, however, considering the available evidence; no strong conclusions could be drawn since different methods were used to assess each parameter. By means of this literature review, a standard evaluation scheme is proposed, being helpful to regiment further investigations and comparisons on future studies.