Short Versus Regular-Length Implants to Rehabilitate Partially Edentulous Mandible: A 2-Year Prospective Split-Mouth Clinical Study
Many studies have evaluated short implants (SIs); however, it is still unclear whether SIs are reliable and can be used to simplify surgical and prosthetic protocols with successful clinical outcomes. The aim of this nonrandom, conveniently sampled, prospective, split-mouth study was to compare the clinical outcomes when short SI (≤8 mm) or regular-length implants (RIs; >10 mm) were used in the posterior mandible 2 years after the delivery of splinted reconstructions. Each participant (N = 10) received 4 implants in the posterior mandible; 2 SIs were placed on one side, and 2 RIs were placed contralaterally. Implants were restored with splinted, screw-retained, porcelain-fused-to-metal reconstructions. Survival and success rates, peri-implant marginal bone level (MBL), and soft-tissue parameters were evaluated. No participant dropouts were recorded. Both types of implants showed 100% success and survival rates. From prosthetic delivery to 24 months postloading, bone remineralization of +0.40 mm for the SIs and +0.36 mm for the RIs was observed without statistically significant differences in MBL between the implant types (P = .993). SIs showed significantly higher (P = .001) clinical attachment level and probing depth values. Chipping occurred in one situation in the RI group, resulting in a 97.5% prosthetic success rate, which was 100% for the SIs. After 2 years, SIs with splinted reconstructions showed comparable clinical outcomes to those of RIs. Further long-term controlled clinical studies with balanced experimental designs evaluating random and larger populations are required to corroborate these findings.

Figure 1. Box plot of the marginal bone loss measurements from implant placement (I), prosthetic delivery (PD), and both 12- and 24-month follow-up.
Figure 2. Radiologic evaluation of one of the study participants at (A) prosthetic delivery and (B) 24-month follow-up.

Example of one of the participants included in the study. (A) Initial situation. (B) Status at 24-month follow-up.
Contributor Notes