International Journal of Oral Implantology & Clinical Research

Register      Login

VOLUME 9 , ISSUE 1-3 ( January-December, 2018 ) > List of Articles


A Multicenter Retrospective Study Comparing Survival Rates of Short Dental Implants (<10 mm) with Ungrafted Transcrestal Sinus Floor Elevation Procedures and Longer Implants (≥10 mm)

Rabie M El Huni, Yaser Y El Kareimi

Keywords : Short dental implants, Survival, Transcrestal sinus floor elevation

Citation Information : El Huni RM, El Kareimi YY. A Multicenter Retrospective Study Comparing Survival Rates of Short Dental Implants (<10 mm) with Ungrafted Transcrestal Sinus Floor Elevation Procedures and Longer Implants (≥10 mm). Int J Oral Implantol Clin Res 2018; 9 (1-3):1-6.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10012-1178

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-12-2019

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2018; The Author(s).


Objectives: Investigating whether or not the use of short dental implants (<10 mm) results in similar survival rates to longer implants (≥10 mm) in combination with transcrestal sinus lifting procedures without grafting. Materials and methods: Twenty partially edentulous patients with one or both maxillary posterior segments, treated in the time period between March 2014 and December 2016 with either short dental implants (group I) or had a preoperative transcrestal sinus floor elevation (TSFE) procedure without bone graft (group II), were retrospectively enrolled in this study. Patients were 15 females and 5 males; the mean age, at the time of implant placement, was 42.09 ± 6.96 years for group I and 39.22 ± 6.9 for group II, ranging between 30 years and 54 years. Based on preoperative periapical radiographs, the residual alveolar heights were judged to be less than 10 mm until 7 mm. Postoperatively, the amount of new radiopacity between the sinus floor and the alveolar crest of group II cases was then measured using a digital ruler from the mesial and distal surfaces of each implant. In total, 11 implants were placed in group I and 9 implants were placed in group II. Results: After a mean follow-up period of 31.9 ± 9.4 months for group I and 30.5 ± 6.13 for group II, with some implants up to 4 years in duty, a survival rate of 100% was reported for both groups. The mean bone level, for group II, at the implant placement was 8.58 ± 0.81 mm and, after 2.5 years, it was 10.8 ± 0.85 mm. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this retrospective clinical study, the results confirmed the reliability of both, the TSFE without grafting procedure and the use of short dental implants in posterior maxillary edentulous spaces of reduced heights.

PDF Share
  1. Pietrokovski J, Starinsky R, et al. Morphologic characteristics of bony edentulous jaws. J Prosthodont 2007;16:141–147. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2007.00165.x.
  2. Schropp L, Wenzel A, et al. Bone healing and soft tissue contour changes following single-tooth extraction: a clinical and radiographic 12-month prospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2003;23:313–332.
  3. Sharan A, Madjar D. Maxillary sinus pneumatization following extractions: a radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008;23:48–56.
  4. Boyne PJ, James RA. Grafting of the maxillary sinus floor with autogenous marrow and bone. J Oral Surg 1980;38:613–616.
  5. Wood RM, Moore DL. Grafting of the maxillary sinus with intraorally harvested autogenous bone prior to implant placement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;3:209–214.
  6. Pjetursson BE, Tan WC, et al. A systematic review of the success of sinus floor elevation and survival of implants inserted in combination with sinus floor elevation. Part I: lateral approach. J Clin Periodontol 2008;35(Suppl 8):216–240. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2008.01272.x.
  7. Tatum H Jr. Maxillary and sinus implant reconstructions. Dent Clin North Am 1986;30:207–229.
  8. Summers RB. The osteotome technique: part 3 – Less invasive methods of elevating the sinus floor. Compendium 1994;15:698–700.
  9. Deporter D, Todescan R, et al. Simplifying management of the posterior maxilla using short, porous surfaced dental implants and simultaneous indirect sinus elevation. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2000;20:476–485.
  10. Lo Giudice G, Iannello G, et al. Transcrestal Sinus Lift Procedure Approaching Atrophic Maxillary Ridge: A 60-Month Clinical and Radiological Follow-Up Evaluation. Int J Dent 2015;2015:261652. DOI: 10.1155/2015/261652, Epub 2015 Sep 16.
  11. Lundgren S, Moy P, et al. Augmentation of the maxillary sinus floor with particulated mandible: a histologic and histomorphometric study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996;11:760–766.
  12. Fillingham Y, Jacobs J. Bone grafts and their substitutes. Bone Joint J 2016;98(1 Suppl A):6–9. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.98B.36350.
  13. Hallman M, Sennerby L, et al. A clinical and histologic evaluation of implant integration in the posterior maxilla after sinus floor augmentation with autogenous bone, bovine hydroxyapatite, or a 20:80 mixture. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:635–643.
  14. Tan WC, Lang NP, et al. A systematic review of the success of sinus floor elevation and survival of implants inserted in combination with sinus floor elevation. Part II: transalveolar technique. J Clin Periodontol 2008;35(Suppl 8):241–254.
  15. Cricchio G, Sennerby L, et al. Sinus bone formation and implant survival after sinus membrane elevation and implant placement: a 1- to 6-year follow-up study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2011;22:1200–1212. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2010.02096.x.
  16. Borges FL, Dias RO, et al. Simultaneous sinus membrane elevation and dental implant placement without bone graft: a 6-month follow-up study. J Periodontol 2011;82:403–412. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2010. 100343.
  17. Bruschi GB, Crespi R, et al. Transcrestal sinus floor elevation: a retrospective study of 46 patients up to 16 years. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012 Oct 1;14(5):759–767. DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2010.00313.x.
  18. Thoma DS, Zeltner M, et al. EAO Supplement Working Group 4 – EAO CC 2015 Short implants versus sinus lifting with longer implants to restore the posterior maxilla: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015;26(Suppl. 11):154–169. DOI: 10.1111/clr.12615.
  19. Monje A, Chan HL, et al. Are short dental implants (<10 mm) effective? A meta-analysis on prospective clinical trials. J Periodontol 2013 Jul;84(7):895–904.
  20. Fugazzotto PA, Beagle JR, et al. Success and failure rates of 9 mm or shorter implants in the replacement of missing maxillary molars when restored with individual crowns: preliminary results 0 to 84 months in function. A retrospective study. J Periodontol 2004;75:327–332. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2004.75.2.327.
  21. Lundgren SC, Gricchio G, et al. Sinus Floor Elevation Procedures to Enable Implant Placement and Integration: Techniques, Biological Aspects and Clinical Outcomes. Periodontol 2000 2017;73:103–120. DOI: 10.1111/prd.12165.
  22. Tetsch J, Tetsch P, et al. Long-term results after lateral and osteotome technique sinus floor elevation: a retrospective analysis of 2190 implants over a time period of 15 years. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010 May 1;21(5):497–503. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2008.01661.x.
  23. Peleg M, Garg AK, et al. Predictability of simultaneous implant placement in the severely atrophic posterior maxilla: a 9-year longitudinal experience study of 2132 implants placed into 731 human sinus grafts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006;21: 94–102.
  24. Mordenfeld A, Albrektsson T, et al. A 10-year clinical and radiographic study of implants placed after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with an 80:20 mixture of deproteinized bovine bone and autogenous bone. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2014;16:435–446. DOI: 10.1111/cid.12008.
  25. Thor A, Sennerby L, et al. Bone formation at the maxillary sinus floor following simultaneous elevation of the mucosal lining and implant installation without graft material: an evaluation of 20 patients treated with 44 Astra Tech implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007; 65(7 Suppl 1):64–72. DOI: 10.1016/j.joms.2006.10.047.
  26. Boyne PJ. Analysis of performance of root-form endosseous implants placed in the maxillary sinus. J Long Term Eff Med Implants 1993;3:143–159.
  27. Johansson LA, Isaksson S, et al. Evaluation of bone regeneration after three different lateral sinus elevation procedures using micro-computed tomography of retrieved experimental implants and surrounding bone: a clinical, prospective, and randomized study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013;28:579–586. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.2892.
  28. Srouji S, Ben-David D, et al. The innate osteogenic potential of the maxillary sinus (Schneiderian) membrane: an ectopic tissue transplant model simulating sinus lifting. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010;39:793–801. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2010.03.009.
  29. Gruber R, Kandler B, et al. Por-cine sinus mucosa holds cells that respond to bone morphogenetic protein BMP-6 and BMP-7 with increased osteogenic differentiation in vitro. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:575–580. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01062.x.
  30. Palma VC, Magro-Filho O, et al. Bone reformation and implant integration following maxillary sinus membrane elevation: an experimental study in primates. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2006;8:11–24. DOI: 10.2310/j.6480.2005.00026.x.
  31. Nkenke E, Weisbach V, et al. Morbidity of harvesting of bone grafts from the iliac crest for preprosthetic augmentation procedures: A prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2004;33:157–163. DOI: 10.1054/ijom.2003.0465.
  32. Pommer B, Frantal S, et al. Impact of dental implant length on early failure rates: A meta-analysis of observational studies. J Clin Periodontol 2011;38:856–863. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051X.2011. 01750.x.
  33. Bischof M, Nedir R, et al. A five-year life-table analysis on wide neck ITI implants with prosthetic evaluation and radiographic analysis: Results from a private practice. Clin Oral Implants Res 2006;17: 512–520. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01271.x.
  34. Fan T, Li Y, et al. 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.
  35. Lemos CA, Ferro-Alves ML, et al. Short dental implants versus standard dental implants placed in the posterior jaws: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2016 Apr 1;47:8–17.
  36. Ludlow JB, Ivanovic M. Comparitive dosimetry of dental CBCT devices and 64-slice CT for oral and maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2008;106:106–114. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2008.03.018.
  37. Sennerby L, Andersson P, et al. Evaluation of a novel cone beam computed tomography scanner for bone density examinations in preoperative 3D reconstructions and correlation with primary implant stability. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2015;17:844–853. DOI: 10.1111/cid.12193.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.