J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg 2019; 45(5): 260~266
7-mm-long dental implants: retrospective clinical outcomes in medically compromised patients
Truc Thi Hoang Nguyen*, Mi Young Eo*, Yun Ju Cho, Hoon Myoung, Soung Min Kim
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
Soung Min Kim
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, 101 Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul 03080, Korea
TEL: +82-2-2072-0213 FAX: +82-2-766-4948
E-mail: smin5@snu.ac.kr
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6916-0489
Received June 15, 2018; Revised August 28, 2018; Accepted August 30, 2018.; Published online October 31, 2019.
© The Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons.. All rights reserved.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Objectives: Dental implants shorter than 8 mm, called short dental implants (SDIs), have been considered to have a lower success rate than standard length implants. But recent studies have shown that SDIs have a comparable success rate, and implant diameter was more important for implant survival than implant length. Also, SDIs have many advantages, such as no need for sinus lifting or vertical bone grafting, which may limit use in medically compromised patients.
Materials and Methods: In this study, 33 patients with 47 implants 7-mm long were examined over the last four years. All patients had special medical history and were categorized into 3 groups: systemic disorders, such as diabetes mellitus (controlled or uncontrolled), mental disability, and uncontrolled hypertension; oral cancer ablation with reconstruction, with or without radiotherapy; diverse osteomyelitis, such as osteoradionecrosis and bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw. Most of these patients have insufficient residual bone quality due to mandible atrophy or sinus pneumatization.
Results: The implant diameters were 4.0 (n=38), 4.5 (n=8), and 5.0 mm (n=1). Among the 47 implants placed, 2 implants failed before the last followup. The survival rate of 7-mm SDIs was 95.74% from stage I surgery to the last follow-up. Survival rates did not differ according to implant diameter. The mean marginal bone loss (MBL) at 3 months, 1 and 2 years was significantly higher than at implant installation, and the MBL at 1 year was also significantly higher than at 3 months. MBL at 1 and 2 years did not differ significantly.
Conclusion: Within the limitations of the present study, the results indicate that SDIs provide a reliable treatment, especially for medically compromised patients, to avoid sinus lifting or vertical bone grafting. Further, long-term follow-up is needed.
Keywords: Dental implants, Survival rates, Alveolar bone loss

Current Issue

25 October 2019
Vol. 45
No. 5 pp. 231~299

Indexed in