Shorter Implants: Viable Alternatives to Sinus Lifts?
posted in Sinus Lifts, en, Hot Posts
« How Do I Make the Transition to Cone Beam Volumetric Tomography? | Heavy Metal Poisoning: Potential Implant Complications? »
Print This PostDr. L. asks:
The field of shorter implants keeps expanding and it looks as though more and more successful cases with shorter implants are being done. I am wondering if the traditional guidelines for the minimum length of implants for single and multiple units needs to be revised. As for myself, I am a general practitioner and I do not want to do sinus lifts, since that is more than I feel comfortable doing. I have been considering changing my treatment approach to the maxillary posterior area and using shorter implants instead of referring the patient for sinus lift. Have any of you been doing this? What were your results? Are these shorter implants viable alternatives to sinus lift and conventional length implants?
Featured Courses
- Computer Guided Implant Dentistry: Stents and Guides: One-Day Lecture and Hands-On Workshop
- Advanced Placement of Implants: Block Bone Graft and Open Sinus Lift:
- Implant Placement for an Overdenture: A Two-Day Lecture and Hands-On Workshop
- Immediate Loading and Restorations in the Aesthetic Zone
- DEKA UltraSpeed CO2 Laser with DOT Scanner Training
Free Daily Email Alert Click Here>>
Search
>>Browse Recent CommentsFeatured Manufacturer
Subscribe for FREE!
Keep current on the latest dental implant discussions! It's Free!
>>Click Here to Subscribe
Subscribe in an RSS Reader
Editor Picks
- Orienting Drills and Implants to Avoid Lingual Concavity?
- Buccal Bone Loss on Immediate Implant: Recommendations?
- Implant Lost in Sinus: What to Do?
- Bisphosphonates: What is the Latest Protocol?
- Membrane Dislodged: Recommendations?
- Perforated the Lingual Cortical Plate: Expect Complications?
- Implant Fixture Too Close to Root of Adjacent Tooth: Will it Osseointegrate?
- Exposure of Membrane: Why?
- MK III Implant: When is the Best Time to Place the Final Abutment?
- Post-Operative Infections from Bone Grafting?
21 Responses to “ Shorter Implants: Viable Alternatives to Sinus Lifts? ”
I think for an upper molar a 8mm long implant, over 4,5mm diameter can be enough, if the crown length is not too much. But, only, if this enosseal length will not be shorter after a half year. That means no overloading, enough bone around the implant, no polished collar enosseal, mini threads/groves, no micro gap, no residual cement … I have now some cases with ImplantDirect’s S-plant, and it works. It’s not a simple question, but the system can also not be a weak point.
Recent artcle from Dr. Paul Fugazzotto on this topic.
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008 May-Jun;23(3):487-96.
It all depends on the case and the implant you are using.
Thanks for pointing out the Fugazzotto article. You can find the abstract for this article by
clicking here.
As I understand the article from Fugazotto includes ALL patients with short implants in both the mandible and maxilla. As a typical example is Prof. Branemarks first case in the mandible, short implants in the mandible held the patients protheses for over 40years (the rest of the patents life). As we all know the bone quality differs a hole lot between the mandible and the posterior maxilla. However if You have a wide crest with more than 6mm of bone below the sinus and place one implant/tooth with bicortical anchorich I would say You are on the safe side. Place implants with a rough surface and let them heal without load for at least three month.
However if You place implants more and more often I personally would recommend You to attend courses and learn how to manage sinuslifts. Best of luck!
Short implants certainly work well if you have sufficient width. I’ve placed quite a number of Bicon 6×5.7mm. In the mandible, the failure rate is virtually zero. Bicon also has 5×6mm and even 4.5×6mm. Surprisingly, these work well too. I’m also placed some 6×6mm Korean implants, but I have not restored sufficient numbers to say that they definitely work. So far, the results look promising.
One problem with short and wide implants is that it’s difficult to obtain primary stability. Like Bicon implants, they often spin in the osteotomy. To play safe, I never do 1 stage surgery with short implants even if the manufacturer swears that it’s OK to do so.
Nevertheless, I would not hesitate to do a sinus lift and place a 10mm implant if circumstances permit. My short implants are usually placed in the posterior mandible.
Dear all,
If you lose bone on short implant, you will lose your implant. If you lose bone on normal implant, you only lose satisaction of perfection.
So what’s wrong with the sinus lift?
It’s so easy game…
I am a GP and I have placed more than 2000 implants. THe posterior Maxilla is where I have had the most commoncly gotten burned. I have numerous delayed failures - mostly lifecore stage one implants 8mm. I have changes my protocol ot ASTRA, at least 9mm, but preferably 11 or more. You must be able to do a sinus lift at least an internal. If you lose an implant you have to be able to go back in and replace it. Then you go from short to shorter with out a sinus lift. Bone quality can really be poor back there allow 6 months for integration. Don’t use short implants. I don’t think Fugazattos results apply to the real world - don’t learn the hard way.
Think of the blood supply associated with 4-6mm of mostly cortical maxillary bone between the sinus and the mouth.
How predictably will that heal or handle periodontal disease or………
In my opinion, The predictability and low morbidity and mortality of a sinus lift does not support the use of implants shorter than 9mm (Used to be 10mm until Astra sucked me in:)).
Plan for the worst and don’t hope for the best….
I would suggest that firstly you look at using Endopore implants. These are particularly suited where there is limited bone height. I have been using these for over 14 years and if correctly placed they are very successful . Although they do have a 5mm long implant, I would suggest that you don’t use shorter than 7mm in the post maxilla. Also you should be familiar with the Summers osteotome sinus lift procedure. Endopore Implants are ideally suited for this procedure and it is a conservative and simple sinus lift procedure where there is at least 4mm of bone present.
As a specialist, I have seen a lot of posterior max. cases done with short/wide fixtures by other surgeons. Often times I have seen the fixture offset to the palatal to compensate for limited ridge width. So while there was no need for a sinus lift, off axis loading was increased. I think the technology works, but it may set us up for long-term issues.
I use Endopores, and regularly avoid sinus lifts by using 5×5 o 4.1×7 mm implants. Just remember that this implants are great and work even better when used as stand alone(not in bridges) but with those you can make full sized molars.
best of luck
During a period of 8 years I have placed & restored in the maxillary molar area more than 400 short bicon implants at Beirut Implant Dentistry Center where I practice .The length varied between 5.7mm,6mm & 8mm .Failure rate was only 4.3% .About 23% were single molars while 77% were splinted to other implants(bridges).Dr Shulte who teaches at The restorative department at Minnosotta University published a study on 889 single short bicon implants placed and restored over a period of 12 yrs. The success rate he had was 98.2 % .That was published 2007 at the journal of prosthetic dentistry .Another publication on bicon short implants was published 2005 by Dr Dodson & c0-workers at I JOMI . This publication showed that there was no statistical difference in success rate between bicon 6X5.7mm(short) & non 6X5.7mm implants .Proper surgical techniques & skillful operator with correct diagnosis & treatment planning is a must.
My only addition would be to view the CT scans of those posterior maxillas. Most of the ones I see only HAVE three or four mm of bone thickness to begin with! (We see many elderly patients, fully or partly edentulous for decades.)
Thanks everyone for real-life stats on Bicon-we’re considering those also.
I wonder how many posterior maxilla implant placements included a fortutous accidental internal lift by tenting the Schneiderian membrane….
Murray Arlin published a retrospective study using evaluating the excellent success rates of short Straumann implants.
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006 Sep-Oct;21(5):769-76
(go to www.pubmed.com and search “Arlin” for the abstract)
Bisphosphonates:
The NEJM published this the results of a ten year oral bisphosphonate study. A large patient group was used. All took the medication for five years. Then BMD was measured. Half then continued on the bisphosphonate and the others did not. At the end of another five years BMD and fracture rates were compared. The results showed that the patients in this test had the same benefit from five years as of ten. The BMDs and fracture rates were extremely close in the two groups.
There is a company in Houston - ADT - that helps set up partnerships to make CBCT ownership and use more cost effective. They also help integrating the use into the practice.
this paper may be useful.part one is also interesting
A 10-year prospective study of ITI dental implants placed in the posterior region. II: Influence of the crown-to-implant ratio and different prosthetic treatment modalities on crestal bone loss.
Blanes RJ, Bernard JP, Blanes ZM, Belser UC.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2007 Dec;18(6):707-14. Epub 2007 Aug 13.
Dear Xabier,
I also love this paper - a recent, 10-year prospective cohort study (i.e. good quality research) - which shows that the crazier your crown:implant ratio, the BETTER the crestal bone appears to be.
Counter-intuitive from everything we’ve learned about teeth, but as we’re all discovering, implants aren’t teeth and short implants work great.
Kind Regards,
Bill
I have quickly read through most of the above comments, basically stating that solid engineering principles of crown/root ratios in natural teeth do not apply to implant/crown ratios.
I am always amazed to see a stubby little Bicon implant or an Endopore midget supporting a crown that is double their length….fascinating, but I still believe in proven with time engineering principles and the advantage and ease of sinus elevations… of course this is only my opinion, and yes there are still those of us around who believe in Jack and the Beanstock….. I call him “Jackie Beans”
Gerald Rudick dds Montreal
please don’t quote engineering principle if you really don’t know them. Did you ever see a lamp post or fence post they don’t get placed deep in the ground, they don’t follow crown root ratio at all because they don’t have a “pdl” . They are solid just like a well anchored short implant. Endopore implants work as long as they stay fully sub gingival if the rough surface becomes exposed they FAIL. I neve used Bicon they are placed 2mm below bone and their prosthetics is too different. But they work acoording to sound engineering principles . Ok Jack.
THIS ALSO HAS TO DO WITH YOUR COMFORT LEVEL AND WHAT DOES THE PATIENT WANT TO ENDURE AS WELL AS COST. A SIMPLER METHOD IS USUALLY BETTER FOR THE PATIENT. THIS DESERVES A LONG TERM, HONEST CLINICAL STUDY.
i have used quite a few Bicon implants shorter ones and they work exceeding well. the emergence profile with the anteriors is amazing.
i used to wonder how it would work keeping in mind the crown and root length ratio. But have seen it working well.
an alternative if one does not want to carry out a sinus lift procedure.
Leave a Comment
Note: Please refrain from ad hominem attacks, and promotional comments. Outside links are not permitted in comments. Though we require an email to route questionable comments to our editors, we will NEVER publish your email or use it for any other purpose. Thank you for your understanding.
Note: At times your comment may not appear on the website immediately, because it has been sent to our editors for approval. Once approved, we will publish the comment. There is NO need to resubmit your comment, if it does not appear on the website immediately.