Wang Miaozhen, Liu Feng, Ulm Christian, Shen Huidan, Rausch-Fan Xiaohui
National Engineering Laboratory for Digital and Material Technology of Stomatology, Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, First Clinical Division, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, 37A Xishiku Street, Xicheng District, Beijing 100034, China.
Division of Oral Surgery and Implantology, Dental School, Medical University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Materials (Basel). 2022 Jul 5;15(13):4722. doi: 10.3390/ma15134722.
This study compared the outcome of fixed prostheses supported by short implants (<8 mm) and longer implants (≥8 mm) with an elevated sinus floor after 5 years of follow-up. The literature searches were performed electronically and manually in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases to identify relevant articles published from 1 January 2013 to 31 January 2020. We selected eligible studies using inclusion criteria and assessed their quality. From 1688 identified studies, five randomized controlled trials were included. Between the short implant group and the control group, the implant failure-related pooled risk ratio (RR) was 3.64 (p = 0.07). The RR for technical complications was 2.61 (p = 0.0002), favoring longer implants. Marginal peri-implant bone loss after 1 and 5 years of function showed statistically significant less bone loss at short implants (1 year: mean difference = 0.21 mm; p < 0.00001; 5 years: mean difference = 0.26 mm; p = 0.02). The implant failure and the biological failure of both groups were similar after 5 years of follow-up. Short implants could be an alternative to long implants with an elevated sinus floor for atrophic maxillae in aging populations. Studies with larger trials and longer periods of follow-up (10 years) remain essential.
本研究比较了在随访5年后，短种植体（<8 mm）和长种植体（≥8 mm）支持的固定修复体在窦底提升后的效果。通过在PubMed、EMBASE和Web of Science数据库中进行电子和手动文献检索，以识别2013年1月1日至2020年1月31日发表的相关文章。我们使用纳入标准选择符合条件的研究并评估其质量。从1688项已识别的研究中，纳入了5项随机对照试验。在短种植体组和对照组之间，与种植体失败相关的合并风险比（RR）为3.64（p = 0.07）。技术并发症的RR为2.61（p = 0.0002），表明长种植体更具优势。在功能1年和5年后，短种植体周围的边缘骨丢失在统计学上显著少于长种植体（1年：平均差异 = 0.21 mm；p < 0.00001；5年：平均差异 = 0.26 mm；p = 0.02）。随访5年后，两组的种植体失败和生物学失败情况相似。对于老年人群中萎缩性上颌骨，短种植体可能是窦底提升后长种植体的一种替代选择。进行更大规模试验和更长随访期（10年）的研究仍然至关重要。
