Short Implants versus Standard Implants and Sinus Floor Elevation in Atrophic Posterior Maxilla: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials with ≥5 Years' Follow-Up.

: The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to assess the performance of short implants in comparison with standard implants and sinus floor elevation in atrophic posterior maxilla. : The protocol of the study was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42022375320). An electronic search on three databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) was performed to find randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with ≥5 years' follow-up, published until December 2022. Risk of bias (ROB) was calculated using Cochrane ROB. A meta-analysis was performed for primary (implant survival rate, ISR) and secondary outcomes (marginal bone loss, MBL; biological and prosthetic complications). : Of 1619 articles, 5 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The ISR showed a risk ratio (RR) of 0.97 [0.94, 1.00] (CI 95%), = 0.07. The MBL indicated a WMD of -0.29 [-0.49, -0.09] (CI 95%), = 0.005. Biological complications showed a RR of 0.46 [0.23, 0.91] (CI 95%), = 0.03. Prosthetic complications showed a RR of 1.51 [0.64, 3.55] (CI 95%), = 0.34. : The available evidence suggests that short implants might be used as an alternative to standard implants and sinus floor elevation. After 5 years, in terms of ISR, standard implants and sinus floor elevation showed a higher survival rate comparted to short implants, although statistical significance was not achieved. Future RCTs with long-term follow-up are needed to draw a clear conclusion on the advantages of one method over another.