Early Implant Loading in the Atrophic Posterior Maxilla: An 11-Year Randomised Controlled Trial of 1-Stage Lateral Versus Crestal Sinus Lift and 8-Mm-Long Hydroxyapatite-Coated Implants

Cannizzaro, Gioacchino; Felice, Pietro; Ippolito, Daniela Rita; Lazzarini, Matteo; Velasco‐Ortega, Eugenio; Esposito, Marco

doi:10.36130/ctd.04.2020.04

Cited by 11 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The following supporting information can be downloaded at: , Table S1: Reason for article exclusion [ 27 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 ].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Short Implants versus Standard Implants and Sinus Floor Elevation in Atrophic Posterior Maxilla: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials with ≥5 Years’ Follow-Up

Meşter

Onişor

Stasio

et al. 2023

JPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and objectives: The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to assess the performance of short implants in comparison with standard implants and sinus floor elevation in atrophic posterior maxilla. Materials and methods: The protocol of the study was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42022375320). An electronic search on three databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) was performed to find randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with ≥5 years’ follow-up, published until December 2022. Risk of bias (ROB) was calculated using Cochrane ROB. A meta-analysis was performed for primary (implant survival rate, ISR) and secondary outcomes (marginal bone loss, MBL; biological and prosthetic complications). Results: Of 1619 articles, 5 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The ISR showed a risk ratio (RR) of 0.97 [0.94, 1.00] (CI 95%), p = 0.07. The MBL indicated a WMD of −0.29 [−0.49, −0.09] (CI 95%), p = 0.005. Biological complications showed a RR of 0.46 [0.23, 0.91] (CI 95%), p = 0.03. Prosthetic complications showed a RR of 1.51 [0.64, 3.55] (CI 95%), p = 0.34. Conclusions: The available evidence suggests that short implants might be used as an alternative to standard implants and sinus floor elevation. After 5 years, in terms of ISR, standard implants and sinus floor elevation showed a higher survival rate comparted to short implants, although statistical significance was not achieved. Future RCTs with long-term follow-up are needed to draw a clear conclusion on the advantages of one method over another.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Short Implants versus Standard Implants and Sinus Floor Elevation in Atrophic Posterior Maxilla: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials with ≥5 Years’ Follow-Up

Meşter

Onişor

Stasio

et al. 2023

JPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…126,127 After threads were added to dental implants (i.e., conversion of cylinders into screws in terms of macroscale geometry), the same bioactive coating became successful in long-term clinical use. [128][129][130] 2.3.2 Application of organic compounds to dental implant surfaces. When a dental implant is inserted into the bone, ECM proteins adsorb to the implant surface during hemostasis.…”

Section: Modifications Of Surface Topographymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…, conversion of cylinders into screws in terms of macroscale geometry), the same bioactive coating became successful in long-term clinical use. 128–130…”

Section: Bone–implant Interface (Hard Tissue Integration)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Three interfaces of the dental implant system and their clinical effects on hard and soft tissues

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Data from the same group of samples Pietro et al [24] Pietro et al [25] Roberto et al [26] Pohl V et al [7] Schincaglia et al [27] Marco et al [28] Felix et al [29] Follow-up time < 5 years Marco et al [30] Sahrmann et al [31] Pietro et al [32] Gastaldi et al [33] Bolle et al [34] Jun-Yu et al [35] Taschieri et al [36] Bechara et al [37] Hadzik et al [38] Shah et al [39] Amir et al [40] Length of short implant not less than 8 mm Cannizzaro et al [41]…”

Section: Reason Referencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Short Implants versus Longer Implants with Sinus Floor Elevation: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials with a Post-Loading Follow-Up Duration of 5 Years

Wang¹,

Liu²,

Ulm

et al. 2022

Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study compared the outcome of fixed prostheses supported by short implants (<8 mm) and longer implants (≥8 mm) with an elevated sinus floor after 5 years of follow-up. The literature searches were performed electronically and manually in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases to identify relevant articles published from 1 January 2013 to 31 January 2020. We selected eligible studies using inclusion criteria and assessed their quality. From 1688 identified studies, five randomized controlled trials were included. Between the short implant group and the control group, the implant failure-related pooled risk ratio (RR) was 3.64 (p = 0.07). The RR for technical complications was 2.61 (p = 0.0002), favoring longer implants. Marginal peri-implant bone loss after 1 and 5 years of function showed statistically significant less bone loss at short implants (1 year: mean difference = 0.21 mm; p < 0.00001; 5 years: mean difference = 0.26 mm; p = 0.02). The implant failure and the biological failure of both groups were similar after 5 years of follow-up. Short implants could be an alternative to long implants with an elevated sinus floor for atrophic maxillae in aging populations. Studies with larger trials and longer periods of follow-up (10 years) remain essential.

show abstract

Early Implant Loading in the Atrophic Posterior Maxilla: An 11-Year Randomised Controlled Trial of 1-Stage Lateral Versus Crestal Sinus Lift and 8-Mm-Long Hydroxyapatite-Coated Implants

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

Short Implants versus Standard Implants and Sinus Floor Elevation in Atrophic Posterior Maxilla: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials with ≥5 Years’ Follow-Up

Short Implants versus Standard Implants and Sinus Floor Elevation in Atrophic Posterior Maxilla: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials with ≥5 Years’ Follow-Up

Three interfaces of the dental implant system and their clinical effects on hard and soft tissues

Short Implants versus Longer Implants with Sinus Floor Elevation: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials with a Post-Loading Follow-Up Duration of 5 Years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About