Critical review of literature on the use of short implants

  • Elisa Ciarmatori Dental surgery student, Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences, School of Dentistry, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy.
  • Alfredo Passaretti Phd student, Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences, School of Dentistry, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy.
  • Giovanna Miracolo Attending Doctor, Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences, School of Dentistry, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy.
  • Andrea Cicconetti | andrea.cicconetti@uniroma1.it Professor, Dept. of Oral and Maxillofacial Sciences, School of Dentistry, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy.

Abstract

Aim The aims of this review were to verify the validity of short implants as a treatment option in patients with partial or total edentulism, having more or less atrophic jawbones.
Methods A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT) was conducted, involving also prospective and retrospective studies published in  English language between January 2005 and December 2015. The PubMed and Scopus databases were electronically analyzed. Titles and abstracts were selected, and full texts were evaluated. The data were organized in tables and then presented as a narrative analysis.
Results The electronic search provided 891 publications, 50 articles were retrieved in full text and only 11 were included in the review. Although the performance of the implants was evaluated through different success and survival criteria, short implants have shown to have a similar performance to longer implants.
Conclusions Short implants could be considered as a treatment option comparable to traditional lenght implant. However, other studies must be conducted to assess uniform criteria to state the quality of treatment.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Published
2018-07-27
Section
Articles
Keywords
short implant, implant success, implant survival
Statistics
Abstract views: 381

pdf: 188
Share it
Received 2018-04-23
Published 2018-07-27

PlumX Metrics

PlumX Metrics provide insights into the ways people interact with individual pieces of research output (articles, conference proceedings, book chapters, and many more) in the online environment. Examples include, when research is mentioned in the news or is tweeted about. Collectively known as PlumX Metrics, these metrics are divided into five categories to help make sense of the huge amounts of data involved and to enable analysis by comparing like with like.

How to Cite
Ciarmatori, E., Passaretti, A., Miracolo, G., & Cicconetti, A. (2018). Critical review of literature on the use of short implants. Journal of Osseointegration, 10(3), 87-94. https://doi.org/10.23805/jo.2018.10.03.04