Bone Loss, Alveolar — Short Dental Implants (5 mm) Versus Long Dental Implants (10 mm)
Citation(s)
Anitua E, Alkhraist MH, Pinas L, Begona L, Orive G Implant survival and crestal bone loss around extra-short implants supporting a fixed denture: the effect of crown height space, crown-to-implant ratio, and offset placement of the prosthesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014 May-Jun;29(3):682-9. doi: 10.11607/jomi.3404.
Anitua E, Pinas L, Orive G Retrospective study of short and extra-short implants placed in posterior regions: influence of crown-to-implant ratio on marginal bone loss. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Feb;17(1):102-10. doi: 10.1111/cid.12073. Epub 2013 May 8.
Buser D, Janner SF, Wittneben JG, Bragger U, Ramseier CA, Salvi GE 10-year survival and success rates of 511 titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: a retrospective study in 303 partially edentulous patients. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012 Dec;14(6):839-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2012.00456.x.
Chappuis V, Araujo MG, Buser D Clinical relevance of dimensional bone and soft tissue alterations post-extraction in esthetic sites. Periodontol 2000. 2017 Feb;73(1):73-83. doi: 10.1111/prd.12167.
Fan T, Li Y, Deng WW, Wu T, Zhang W Short Implants (5 to 8 mm) Versus Longer Implants (>8 mm) with Sinus Lifting in Atrophic Posterior Maxilla: A Meta-Analysis of RCTs. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2017 Feb;19(1):207-215. doi: 10.1111/cid.12432. Epub 2016 Jun 13.
Lemos CA, Ferro-Alves ML, Okamoto R, Mendonca MR, Pellizzer EP Short dental implants versus standard dental implants placed in the posterior jaws: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2016 Apr;47:8-17. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2016.01.005. Epub 2016 Jan 19.
Pieri F, Forlivesi C, Caselli E, Corinaldesi G Short implants (6mm) vs. vertical bone augmentation and standard-length implants (>/=9mm) in atrophic posterior mandibles: a 5-year retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017 Dec;46(12):1607-1614. doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2017.07.005. Epub 2017 Jul 24.
Sargozaie N, Moeintaghavi A, Shojaie H Comparing the Quality of Life of Patients Requesting Dental Implants Before and After Implant. Open Dent J. 2017 Aug 31;11:485-491. doi: 10.2174/1874210601711010485. eCollection 2017.
Strietzel FP, Reichart PA Oral rehabilitation using Camlog screw-cylinder implants with a particle-blasted and acid-etched microstructured surface. Results from a prospective study with special consideration of short implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007 Oct;18(5):591-600. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2007.01375.x. Epub 2007 Jun 21.
Telleman G, Raghoebar GM, Vissink A, Meijer HJ Impact of platform switching on peri-implant bone remodeling around short implants in the posterior region, 1-year results from a split-mouth clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014 Feb;16(1):70-80. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2012.00461.x. Epub 2012 May 11.
Thoma DS, Haas R, Sporniak-Tutak K, Garcia A, Taylor TD, Hammerle CHF Randomized controlled multicentre study comparing short dental implants (6 mm) versus longer dental implants (11-15 mm) in combination with sinus floor elevation procedures: 5-Year data. J Clin Periodontol. 2018 Dec;45(12):1465-1474. doi: 10.1111/jcpe.13025. Epub 2018 Nov 25.
Short Dental Implants (5 mm) Versus Long Dental Implants (10 mm) in Combination With Sinus Floor Elevation: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Interventional studies are often prospective and are specifically tailored to evaluate direct impacts of treatment or preventive measures on disease.
Observational studies are often retrospective and are used to assess potential causation in exposure-outcome relationships and therefore influence preventive methods.
Expanded access is a means by which manufacturers make investigational new drugs available, under certain circumstances, to treat a patient(s) with a serious disease or condition who cannot participate in a controlled clinical trial.
Clinical trials are conducted in a series of steps, called phases - each phase is designed to answer a separate research question.
Phase 1: Researchers test a new drug or treatment in a small group of people for the first time to evaluate its safety, determine a safe dosage range, and identify side effects.
Phase 2: The drug or treatment is given to a larger group of people to see if it is effective and to further evaluate its safety.
Phase 3: The drug or treatment is given to large groups of people to confirm its effectiveness, monitor side effects, compare it to commonly used treatments, and collect information that will allow the drug or treatment to be used safely.
Phase 4: Studies are done after the drug or treatment has been marketed to gather information on the drug's effect in various populations and any side effects associated with long-term use.
