Two short implants versus one short implant with a cantilever: 5-Year results of a randomized clinical trial

Randomized controlled multi-centre study comparing shorter dental implants (6 mm) to longer dental implants (11-15 mm) in combination with sinus floor elevation procedures: 10-year data

AIM

To compare implant survival and complication rates between shorter and standard-length implants with sinus augmentation and restored with single crowns, at 10 years of loading.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One-hundred and one patients (137 implants) with a ridge height of 5-7 mm in the posterior maxilla were randomly assigned to two treatment modalities: shorter implants (6 mm) (group short [GS]) or standard-length implants (11-15 mm) with sinus grafting (group graft [GG]). Following the insertion of final restorations, patients were regularly recalled for up to 10 years. Assessed outcomes encompassed implant survival, marginal bone levels (MBLs), biological and technical parameters and patient-reported outcome measures (OHIP-49 = Oral Health Impact Profile). Non-parametric statistical analysis was used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

For the 5- to 10-year follow-up period, 77 patients with 105 implants (GS: 36 patients/48 implants; GG: 41/57) were available for re-examination (drop-out rate 21%). Implant survival rates at the patient level were 96.0% (GS; 2 failures) and 100% (GG) (inter-group p = .24). Median MBLs amounted to 0.00 mm (min 0.00; max 3.25; GS) and 0.00 mm (min 0.00; max 4.55; GG) (inter-group p = .73). Technical complications predominantly occurred within the first 5 years (inter-group p > .05). Peri-implantitis rates were 4.2% (GS) and 13.3% (GG) (intergroup p = .37). Median OHIP-49 scores were 7.00 (0.00; 39.00; GS) and 9.00 (0.00; 196; GG) (inter-group p = .61) at 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on similar 10-year implant survival rates, reduced patient morbidity and lower costs, the use of shorter dental implants might well serve as an alternative treatment concept to longer implants placed in conjunction with sinus grafting for patients with a limited ridge height in the posterior maxilla. Study register: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01030523.

Effect of implant type on the stability of cantilever fixed dental prostheses: An in vitro study

OBJECTIVES

To simulate the replacement of a premolar with an implant-supported cantilever fixed dental prosthesis (ICFDP) and how the fracture load is affected by implant type, positioning within the zirconia blank, and aging protocol.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy-two ICFDPs were designed either within the enamel- or dentin layer of a 4Y-PSZ blank for bone-level and tissue-level titanium-zirconium implants. Fracture load was obtained on the cantilever at baseline (no aging) or after aging in a chewing simulator with the load applied within the implant axis (axial aging) or on the cantilever (12 groups with n = 6). A three-way ANOVA was applied (α = .05).

RESULTS

A three-way ANOVA revealed a significant effect on fracture load values of implant type (p = .006) and aging (p < .001) but not for the position within the zirconia blank (p = .847). Fracture load values significantly increased from baseline bone level (608 ± 118 N) and tissue level (880 ± 293 N) when the implants were aged axially, with higher values for tissue level (1065 ± 182 N) than bone level (797 ± 113 N) (p < .001). However, when the force was applied to the cantilever, fracture load values decreased significantly for tissue-level (493 ± 70 N), while values for bone-level implants remained stable (690 ± 135 N).

CONCLUSIONS

For ICFDPs, the use of bone-level implants is reasonable as catastrophic failures are likely to be restricted to the restoration, whereas with tissue-level implants, the transmucosal portion of the implant is susceptible to deformation, making repair more difficult.

Mechanical stability of posterior implant-supported monolithic zirconia cantilever on titanium-base abutments. An in vitro study

PURPOSE

Investigate survival and technical complications of two-unit posterior implant-supported cantilever made of monolithic zirconia on titanium-base abutments (Zr-TiB) vs. porcelain-fused-to-metal on castable gold abutments (PFM-GA) using two different implant connections, internal butt-joint (IBJ) and internal conical (IC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-eight implants (4.3 mm diameter) were divided into four groups (n = 12) to support 2-unit mandibular premolar cantilevers with two different materials (Zr-TiB vs. PFM-GA) and two connection types (IBJ vs. IC). Tested groups were as follows: (1) IBJ/Zr-TiB; (2) IBJ/PFM-GA; (3) IC/Zr-TiB; and (4) IC/PFM-GA. Specimens were thermomechanical aged (1,200,000 cycles, 98 N, 5-55°C) with occlusal axial load on the pontic. Catastrophic and non-catastrophic events were registered, and removal torque values measured before and after aging. Specimens surviving aging were subjected to loading until failure. Survival, total complication rates, torque loss (%), and bending moments were calculated.

RESULTS

From 48 specimens, 38 survived aging. Survival rates significantly varied from 16.7% (IC/PFM-GA) to 100% (IBJ/Zr-TiB; IBJ/PFM-GA; IC/Zr-TiB) (p < .01). Internal conical connection revealed significantly higher torque loss (IC/ZrTiB - 67%) compared to internal butt-joint (IBJ/Zr-TiB - 44%; IBJ/PFM-GA - 46%) (p < .01). Bending moments were higher in internal butt-joint connections than in internal conical (p < .05).

CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Two-unit posterior implant-supported cantilever FDPs replacing mandibular premolars composed of monolithic zirconia on titanium-base abutments demonstrated higher mechanical stability compared to porcelain-fused-to-metal on castable gold abutments in this in vitro study. The internal conical connection combined with porcelain-fused-to-metal on gold abutments revealed a high number of failures; therefore, their clinical use may be considered cautiously for this indication.

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Single Crowns or Short Fixed Partial Dentures Supported by Short (≤6 mm) Dental Implants: A Systematic Review

Long-term clinical outcomes of short dental implants (≤6 mm) supporting single crowns or short fixed partial dentures have been reported differently in different studies and need more clarification. This systematic study evaluated the rate of bone loss (BL), the durability of implants equal to or shorter than 6 mm supporting single crowns or short fixed partial dentures, and prosthetic-related side effects during 5 years of follow-up. Five databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane) were electronically and manually searched for longitudinal studies with a follow-up period of 5 years or more until January 2023. The study question was, "Does the implant equal to or shorter than 6 mm affect BL and survival rate of the implant-supported prosthesis after 5 years of follow-up?". From 752 identified articles, nine studies were selected for further evaluation. After 5 years of follow-up, most studies had more than 90% survival rate and the maximum BL was 0.54 mm. Still, in internal and external connections, these changes were not substantial. For example, screw loosening was the most common problem with implanted prostheses. Implants of 6 mm or shorter are a suitable treatment option in atrophic ridges with good durability and fewer side effects during a follow-up period of more than 5 years.

Clinical performance of monolithic zirconia crowns on titanium-zirconium reduced-diameter implants in the molar area: Interim data at three years of a randomized controlled trial

AIM

The aim of the present study was (i) to evaluate the clinical performance of reduced-diameter implants placed in the molar area and (ii) to test whether monolithic zirconia implant-supported crowns lead to similar clinical outcomes compared to porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 76 patients needing a single implant crown in the posterior region were recruited. All patients received a titanium-zirconium reduced-diameter implant (Straumann Roxolid, Tissue Level, Standard Plus, diameter 3.3 mm, regular neck) randomly allocated to receive either a (1) monolithic zirconia crown (test) or (2) porcelain-fused-to-metal crown (control). Implant survival, prosthetic outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes were assessed at crown delivery and after 3 years of follow-up. Marginal bone levels (MBL) as well as clinical parameters including probing depth (PD), bleeding on probing (BOP), and plaque levels (PCR) were also recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 59 patients were available at the 3-year follow-up; 32 patients with a monolithic zirconia crown (TEST) and 27 patients with a porcelain-fused-to-metal crown (CONTROL). 14 implants (11 implant fractures/3 aseptic losses) were lost leading to an estimated implant survival rate of 80% ± 5.1% (95% CI 70.8%-90.8%). Prosthetic complications were limited to the control group and involved minor chippings.

CONCLUSIONS

This type of reduced-diameter implant to support single implant molar crowns in the molar area cannot be recommended. Monolithic zirconia crowns appear to be a viable option in the posterior region showing similar prosthetic outcomes to porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns.

Clinical and radiographic outcomes of implant-supported zirconia fixed dental prostheses with cantilever extension: A proof-of-principle study with a follow-up of at least 1 year

OBJECTIVES

To test the reliability of full zirconia implant-supported fixed dental prostheses with cantilever extension (FDPCs) after at least 1 year of function.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-five patients in need of implant-supported single unit crowns (SUC) and FDPCs in posterior areas were enrolled. After implant placement, patients were rehabilitated with screw-retained full-zirconia FDPCs. Implant survival rate, pocket probing depth (PPD), presence/absence of bleeding on probing (BoP), and presence/absence of mechanical/technical complications were recorded. Mesial and distal radiographic marginal bone levels (mBLs) from baseline (i.e., recall appointment 3-6 months after implant loading [T0]) to the follow-up examination (i.e., latest recall appointment after at least 12 months after T0 [T1]), were calculated.

RESULTS

Thirty patients with 34 FDPCs (31 SUCs and 3 FDPs) supported by 37 implants were available for analysis after a mean loading time of 2.6 ± 1.5 years (range: 13-87 months). No implants were lost. MBLs and mean PPD values did not change statistically significantly from T0 to T1 from 0.92 mm ± 0.42 to 0.96 mm ± 0.38 (95% CI: -0.07/0.17; p = .418) and from 2.99 mm ± 0.70 to 3.27 mm ± 0.71 (95% CI: -0.11/0.68; p = .25) respectively. Peri-implant mucositis was diagnosed in 22 cases. Screw-loosening and zirconia chipping occurred 1× in 4 patients.

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of the present proof-of-principle study, the use of full-zirconia FDPCs in posterior areas seems a valid and safe short-term treatment option.

Short implants compared to regular dental implants after bone augmentation in the atrophic posterior mandible: umbrella review and meta-analysis of success outcomes

PURPOSE

To assess the body of evidence of short versus regular implants after bone augmentation (BA) in the atrophic posterior mandible in the context of implant treatment success outcomes.

METHODS

Seven databases, two registries, and reference lists were searched for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (SR/MA), randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and longitudinal studies published in English, Spanish or German since 2012. Confidence in the SR/MA methodology was evaluated using AMSTAR-2 and the risk of bias of primary studies using Cochrane's RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I. A random-effects meta-analysis and a meta-regression were performed for continuous and dichotomous outcomes. GRADE approach was used to assess the certainty of the evidence.

RESULTS

Eighteen SRs/MAs, most of them "critically low" and "low" confidence with substantial overlap, included 14 relevant RCTs with a high risk of bias. A cohort study with moderate risk of bias was added. Quantitative synthesis of 595 implants and 281 hemiarches/patients indicates that the use of short implants (< 10 mm) compared to regular implants and BA may reduce implant failure at 1-year follow-up, and marginal bone loss (MBL) at 3-, 5-, and 8-year follow-up; is likely to reduce the risk of biological complications at 1-, 3-, 5-, and 8-year follow-up; and may be the patient's preferred alternative. There is a correlation between bone height, MBL and biological complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence partially suggests that the use of short implants could decrease implant failure, MBL, and biological complications, and increase patient satisfaction. However, given the need for further RCTs and real-world evidence to fully evaluate short- and long-term outcomes, it would be prudent for clinicians to carefully consider the individual needs and circumstances of the patients before deciding whether to use short implants. Trial registration PROSPERO CRD42022333526.

Implant-supported zirconia fixed partial dentures cantilevered in the lateral-posterior area: A 4-year clinical results

Background

Implant-supported cantilever prostheses enable a more straightforward rehabilitation and may be a therapeutic option to reduce treatment morbidity, costs, and time. This study evaluated the clinical outcomes of fixed implant-supported partial dentures made of monolithic zirconia with a cantilever design to replace missing posterior teeth.

Methods

Fifteen partially edentulous patients received 34 implants and were provided with 16 zirconia fixed partial prostheses (FPPs) with one cantilever extension replacing mandibular or maxillary missing posterior and lateral teeth. Patients were re-examined for up to 4 years. Patient ages ranged from 41 to 65 years, with a mean age of 53±12 years; 47% were female, and 53% were male. The patients were observed for a mean period of 42±6 months with a minimum of 3 years and a maximum of 4 years.

Results

Peri-implantitis was observed in two cases. No chipping or fracture of any FPP was detected. Loosening of the abutment screw was a technical complication in one case. The rehabilitation survival rate was 100%. Implant-supported zirconia FPP with one mesial cantilever extension provides an aesthetic, functional treatment alternative to replace missing molars, premolars, and canines. These excellent clinical outcomes occurred over a mean observation time of 42±6 months.

Conclusion

Using monolithic zirconia milled with CAD-CAM technology might be an alternative to the metal-ceramic restoration in implant-supported FPP with one cantilever.

Radiographic density changes may be associated with overloading and implant loss on short implants: A 5-year analysis of a randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To analyze changes in radiographic bone density around short implants with and without cantilevers at 5 years post-loading.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-six patients with two adjacent posterior missing teeth participated in this randomized controlled clinical trial. All patients were randomly allocated to receive either two short implants (6 mm) with single-unit restorations (group TWO) or one single short implant (6 mm) with a cantilever restoration (group ONE-C). Patients were followed up at 6 months, 1, 3, and 5 years. Radiographic analysis was performed, through an arbitrary gray scale value (GSV) of the peri-implant bone, assessing the changes in radiographic density between groups and between time points. Differences in GSV between groups and over time were calculated using a generalized estimating equation to allow for adjustments for the correlation within individuals and between time points.

RESULTS

At 5 years, 26 patients remained in the study (15 in group ONE-C; 11 in group TWO). Implant survival rates were 80.4% in group TWO and 84.2% in group ONE-C (p = 0.894). The radiographic analysis revealed that GSVs increased in both groups over time (p < 0.001). The overall radiographic density was higher in group ONE-C than in group TWO in the maxilla (p = 0.030). Conversely, in the mandible, these significant differences between the groups were not found (p > 0.05). Compared to the implants that survived, the implants that failed demonstrated a distinct radiographic density pattern (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Within the limitations of the present study, the radiographic bone density in the maxilla appears to increase distinctly around short implants when cantilevers are used. In contrast, the radiographic density in the mandible appears to be unaffected by the use of a cantilever, suggesting a lower threshold of adaptation to occlusal forces and thus a higher susceptibility to overload and implant loss at earlier time points.