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

Fabio Rossi, Lorenzo Tuci, Lorenzo Ferraioli, Emanuele Ricci, Andreea Suerica, Daniele Botticelli, Gerardo Pellegrino and Pietro Felice
Additional contact information
Fabio Rossi: Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Science, University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
Lorenzo Tuci: Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Science, University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
Lorenzo Ferraioli: Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Science, University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
Emanuele Ricci: Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Science, University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
Andreea Suerica: ARDEC Academy, 47923 Rimini, Italy
Daniele Botticelli: ARDEC Academy, 47923 Rimini, Italy
Gerardo Pellegrino: Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Science, University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
Pietro Felice: Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Science, University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy

IJERPH, 2021, vol. 18, issue 7, 1-12

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 marginal 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).

Keywords: short implants; full arch fixed dental prostheses; sinus floor elevation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/7/3846/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/7/3846/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:7:p:3846-:d:531098

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().