Narrow- (3.0 mm) Versus Standard-Diameter (4.0 and 4.5 mm) Implants for Splinted Partial Fixed Restoration of Posterior Mandibular and Maxillary Jaws: A 5-Year Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence concerning predictability of narrow-diameter implants (NDIs) (<3.3 mm) to restore partially edentulous posterior maxillary and mandibular areas is limited. The aim of this study is to compare the 5-year outcomes of NDIs (3.0 mm) and standard-diameter implants (SDIs) (4.0 to 4.5 mm) supporting fixed partial dentures (FPDs) in posterior mandibular and maxillary jaws. METHODS: All patients treated with at least two adjacent NDIs or SDIs according to available bone thickness and with a minimum follow-up of 5 years after placement were invited to undergo a clinical and radiologic examination. Outcome measures were implant and FPD failures, biologic and prosthetic complications, and marginal bone loss. RESULTS: A total of 107 out of 127 patients attended the examination: 49 (113 implants) of the NDI group, and 58 (126 implants) of the SDI group. Two NDIs failed in one patient versus four SDIs in four patients (P = 0.37). One FPD failed in the NDI group versus two FPDs in the SDI group (P >0.99). Nine biologic complications occurred in the NDI group and twelve in the SDI group (P = 0.81). Twelve prosthetic complications occurred in the NDI group and only two in the SDI group (P = 0.001). Peri-implant marginal bone loss at 5 years was 0.95 ± 0.84 mm for the NDI group and 1.2 ± 0.86 mm for the SDI group (P = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Five-year data indicate that FPD treatment in posterior mandibular and maxillary jaws with NDIs was as reliable as with SDIs, although NDIs showed a higher risk of prosthetic complications.

Rehabilitation of the Atrophic Posterior Maxilla Using Splinted Short Implants or Sinus Augmentation with Standard-Length Implants: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively compare short implants (6 to 8 mm) (short group) to standard-length implants (≥ 11 mm) inserted in combination with a lateral sinus elevation procedure (sinus group), supporting partial fixed prostheses in the atrophic posterior maxilla. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Records of 118 patients treated with fluoride-modified implants in the atrophic posterior maxilla between January 2009 and December 2011 were screened in two private practices. Two to four implants were placed in each patient and loaded after 5 to 6 months with partial fixed prostheses. Patients were followed for at least 3 years after implant placement. Patients were contacted and invited for clinical and radiologic follow-up examinations. Outcome measures were implant failures, complications, soft tissue parameters, and marginal bone levels. Fisher exact and unpaired t tests were used to compare proportions and means at the .05 level of significance. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients attended the examination: 53 (112 implants) in the sinus group and 48 (109 implants) in the short group. The mean observation period was 47.03 ± 7.46 months for the sinus group and 44.18 ± 6.42 months for the short group. Ten surgical complications occurred in nine patients of the sinus group versus only one complication in the short group; the difference was statistically significant (P = .01). Six implants failed in five patients of the sinus group versus two implants in two patients of the short group. At follow-up, mean marginal bone loss was 0.64 ± 0.58 mm in the sinus group vs 0.48 ± 0.5 mm in the short group. No significant difference was observed in terms of implant failures, prosthetic complications, soft tissue parameters, or marginal bone loss between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, both techniques showed similar medium-term outcomes, but short implants provided advantages in terms of a reduced number of surgical complications.

Clinical, esthetic, and radiographic evaluation of small-diameter (3.0-mm) implants supporting single crowns in the anterior region: a 3-year prospective study.

Fifty patients underwent single-tooth replacement in the maxillary and mandibular incisor area using two-piece 3.0-mm-diameter implants. Clinical and radiographic measurements of soft and hard tissue levels and esthetic parameters (pink esthetic score/white esthetic score [PES/WES]) were assessed at 3 years. No implant failed (success rate: 100%), and facial soft tissues and marginal bone levels remained stable throughout the study period. The mean total PES/WES was high (14.1 ± 1.75), and only one implant demonstrated an unfavorable esthetic outcome (PES/WES = 10). The use of 3.0-mm-diameter implants appears to be a viable treatment procedure in the medium term for single-tooth anterior restorations with limited dimensions.