Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Randomized controlled multicentre study comparing short dental implants (6 mm) versus longer dental implants (11–15 mm) in combination with sinus floor elevation procedures. Part 1: demographics and patient‐reported outcomes at 1 year of loading

2014; Wiley; Volume: 42; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1111/jcpe.12323

1600-051X

Daniel S. Thoma, Robert Haas, Marcin Tutak, Abel Garcı́a Garcı́a, Gian Pietro Schincaglia, Christoph H. F. Hämmerle,

Cleft Lip and Palate Research

To test whether or not the use of short dental implants (6 mm) results in an implant survival rate similar to long implants (11-15 mm) in combination with sinus grafting.This multicentre study enrolled 101 patients with a posterior maxillary bone height of 5-7 mm. Patients randomly received short implants (6 mm) (group short) or long implants (11-15 mm) with sinus grafting (group graft). Six months later, implants were loaded with single crowns and patients re-examined at 1 year of loading. Outcomes included treatment time, price calculations, safety, patient-reported outcome measures (OHIP-49 = Oral Health Impact Profile) and implant survival. Statistical analysis was performed using a non-parametric approach.In 101 patients, 137 implants were placed. Mean surgical time was 52.6 min. (group short) and 74.6 min. (group graft). Mean costs amounted to 941EUR (group short) and 1946EUR (group graft). Mean severity scores between suture removal and baseline revealed a statistically significant decrease for most OHIP dimensions in group graft only. At 1 year, 97 patients with 132 implants were re-examined. The implant survival rate was 100%.Both treatment modalities can be considered suitable for implant therapy in the atrophied posterior maxilla. Short implants may be more favourable regarding short-term patient morbidity, treatment time and price.