Short implants are an increasingly common alternative to other surgical techniques in areas where bone availability is reduced. Despite the advantages they offer, a variety of biological repercussions have been described in the literature that can even lead to the loss of these. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the impact of the use of short implants on their survival and on peri-implant bone loss, evaluating the influence that length, diameter, and crown-to-implant ratio (C/I) have on these parameters. This systematic review was based on guidelines proposed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). An electronic search was conducted using terms related to the use of short implants in partially or totally edentulous patients. A total of five databases were consulted in the literature search: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science. After eliminating the duplicate articles and assessing which ones met the inclusion criteria, 15 articles were included for the qualitative analysis and 14 for the quantitative study. Through meta-analysis, the percentage of implant loss and peri-implant bone loss was estimated. Relating these parameters to length, diameter, and C/I ratio, no significant differences have been found for implant loss (values of p = 0.06, 0.10, and 0.9, respectively for length, diameter, and C/I ratio), nor for peri-implant bone loss (values of p = 0.71, 0.72, and 0.36, respectively for length, diameter, and C/I ratio). In conclusion, the use of short implants does not seem to have a significant influence on marginal bone loss or the survival rate of implants.

The aim of this work was to observe the behavior of osteoblast cells cultured in vitro on titanium discs in relation to disc surface roughness and the addition of melatonin to the culture medium. MG63 osteoblast cells were cultivated on 120 Grade 5 Ti divided into three groups: Group E, treated with dual acid etch; Group EP, treated with dual acid etch and calcium phosphate; and Group M, machined. Surface roughness was examined under a laser scanning confocal microscope (CLSM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The proliferation and morphology of cells were determined under fluorescence microscopy and SEM. Messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) of different genes related to osteoblastic differentiation was quantified by means of real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay. The greatest surface roughness was found in Group EP (Ra 0.354 µm), followed by Group E (Ra 0.266 µm), and Group M (Ra 0.131 µm), with statistically significant differences between the groups (p < 0.001). In the presence of melatonin a trend to a higher cell proliferation was observed in all groups although significant differences were only found in Group M (p = 0.0079). Among the genes studied, a significant increase in phosphate-regulating neutral endopeptidase, X-linked (PHEX) expression was observed in cells cultured on EP discs. The addition of melatonin increased osteoblast cell proliferation and differentiation, and may favor the osseointegration of dental implants.

Purpose: The objective of this prospective randomized clinical trial (RCT) was to analyze and compare the clinical behavior of three types of prosthesis supported by single implants in the posterior region after three years of functional loading. Materials and methods: Seventy-five implants were divided into three groups according to the type of prosthetic restoration: screw-retained crown (group GS); cemented crown without finishing line (biologically oriented preparation technique) (group GBOPT); and conventional cemented crown with finishing line (group GCC). After three years in function, clinical parameters (presence of keratinized mucosa, probing depths, bleeding on probing, and radiographic bone loss) were compared between the three experimental groups. The possible correlation between soft tissue clinical parameters and bone loss was also analyzed. Results: Statistical analysis found significant differences in clinical parameters between the different types of crown, with the cemented restoration without finishing line (BOPT) presenting fewer complications and better peri-implant health outcomes including: significantly different KMW data (mm), with significant differences between groups GBOPT and GCC (p < 0.001, Kruskal–Wallis test), with GBOPT obtaining larger quantities of keratinized mucosa (KM); statistically significant differences in probing depth (PD) values between groups GBOPT and GCC (p = 0.010, Kruskal–Wallis test); significant differences in bleeding on probing (BOP) between groups GBOPT and GCC (p = 0.018, Chi² test) in favor of GBOPT. Conclusions: Soft tissue behavior around implants is related to the type of prosthetic restoration used, with cemented prostheses with BOPT presenting better peri-implant soft tissue behavior.

Background and objectives: To compare the medium- to long-term mechanical behavior of overdentures with two different retention systems: overdentures with Locator® axial retention, and vertical insertion overdentures with bar retention, used to rehabilitate edentulous maxillar. Material and Methods: This prospective study assessed patients presenting complete maxillary edentulism, rehabilitated by means of implant-supported overdentures (n = 20), 10 with Locator® axial retention (ODA group) and 10 with overdentures on bars (ODB group). Patients also completed a questionnaire to determine their satisfaction with treatment. Results: The mean follow-up time in both groups was 11.4 years, with follow-up times in both groups ranging from 5 to 14 years. The ODA group suffered mechanical complications such as retention loss, need for nylon retention insert changes, resin fracture, and need for relining. In the ODB group, prosthetic dental wear, screw loosening, and complete prosthetic failure were more common. A total of 19 implants failed (23.8%); of these, 11 were in the ODA group (failure rate = 27.5%) and eight in the ODB group (failure rate = 20%). The patient satisfaction questionnaire obtained a mean score of 7.9 out of 10 in the ODA group, and 9.75 in the ODB group. Conclusions: in rehabilitations of edentulous maxillar by means of implant-supported overdentures, both the systems assessed were shown to be effective in the medium to long term. Patients expressed a high level of satisfaction with the treatments received.

Objective: To evaluate the influence of implant length on marginal bone loss, comparing implants of 4 mm, 6 mm, and >8 mm, supporting two splinted crowns after 36-month functional loading. Materials and Methods: this retrospective clinical trial evaluated the peri-implant behavior of splinted crowns (two per case) on pairs of implants of the same length placed in the posterior maxilla (molar area). Implants were divided into three groups according to length (Group 1: extra-short 4 mm; Group 2: short 6 mm; Group 3: conventional length >8 mm). Marginal bone loss was analyzed using standardized periapical radiographs at the time of loading and 36 months later. Results: 24 patients (19 women and 5 men) were divided into three groups, eight rehabilitations per group, in the position of the maxillary first and second molars. The 48 Straumann^® Standard Plus (Regular Neck (RN)/Wide Neck (WN)) implants were examined after 36 months of functional loading. Statistical analysis found no significant differences in bone loss between the three groups (p = 0.421). No implant suffered biological complications or implant loss. Long implants were associated with less radiographic bone loss. Conclusions: extra-short (4 mm); short (6 mm); and conventional length (>8 mm) implants in the posterior maxilla present similar peri-implant bone loss and 100% survival rates in rehabilitation, by means of two splinted crowns after 36 months of functional loading. Implants placed in posterior positions present better bone loss results than implants placed in anterior positions, regardless of the interproximal area where bone loss is measured. Conventional length (>8 mm) implants show better behavior in terms of distal bone loss than short (6 mm) and extra-short (4 mm) implants.