Two-year follow-up of 4-mm-long implants used as distal support of full-arch fdps compared to 10-mm implants installed after sinus floor elevation. A randomized clinical trial

2Citations
Citations of this article
46Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: In edentulous patients, bone resorption cannot allow the installation of standard implants and it is demanded to use short implants in the residual alveolar bone or longer implants in grafted bone. Aim: To compare the survival and bone level changes of standard plus short 4-mm implants used as distal support of a maxillary full-arch fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) with standard (10-mm) implants placed in association with a bilateral sinus floor augmentation procedure. Material and Methods: Full-arch FDPs supported by six implants were randomly placed in both groups. In the control group, all implants were 10 mm long and 4.1 mm in diameter. The distal implant in both sides of the maxilla was installed after 4 months from bilaterally sinus floor elevation. In the test group (short group), the distal implant in both sides of the maxilla was 4 mm long and 4.1 mm in diameter. No sinus floor elevations were performed in the test group. Clinical assessments and X-rays were taken at prosthesis delivering and after 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were also evaluated before surgery and after 6, 12, and 24 months. Results: The changes over time of the bone level for the short implants were −0.01 ± 0.11 mm, −0.04 ± 0.13 mm, −0.17 ± 0.29 mm, and −0.28 ± 0.37 mm after 6, 12, 18, and 24 months from prosthesis delivering, respectively. For the standard implants, bone changes were −0.21 ± 0.33 mm (p = 0.103), −0.30 ± 0.32 mm (p = 0.023), −0.40 ± 0.37 mm (p = 0.144), and −0.54 ± 0.49 mm (p = 0.128), respectively. A statistically relevant difference was found only at 12 months after loading between the two groups. Conclusions: Similar results on implant survival rate and mar-ginal bone loss were observed for the short and standard implants, placed in association with a bilateral sinus floor augmentation procedure, used as distal support of a maxillary full-arch FDP. A statistically relevant difference was found only at 12 months after loading between the two groups (p = 0.023).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rossi, F., Tuci, L., Ferraioli, L., Ricci, E., Suerica, A., Botticelli, D., … Felice, P. (2021). Two-year follow-up of 4-mm-long implants used as distal support of full-arch fdps compared to 10-mm implants installed after sinus floor elevation. A randomized clinical trial. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18073846

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free