Clinic of Periodontology, Endodontology and Cariology, University Center of Dental Medicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Clinic of Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Material Science, Center of Dental Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
J Dent Res. 2023 Aug;102(9):1015-1021. doi: 10.1177/00220345231170538. Epub 2023 Jun 30.
The aim of the study was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of short dental implants (6-mm test group, TG) to longer implants (10-mm control group, CG) with single crown restorations after 10 y of loading. Patients requiring single-tooth replacement in the posterior jaws were randomly assigned to TG or CG. Implants were loaded with screw-retained single crowns after a healing period of 10 wk. Follow-up appointments were scheduled yearly and comprised patient-adapted oral hygiene reinstructions and polishing of all teeth and implants. After 10 y, clinical and radiographical parameters were assessed again. Out of initially 94 patients (47 in TG and CG, each), 70 (36 TG and 34 CG) could be reassessed. Survival rates accounted for 85.7% (TG) and 97.1% (CG), without significant intergroup difference ( = 0.072). All but 1 lost implant had been located in the lower jaw. These implants were not lost due to peri-implantitis but due to a late loss of osseointegration without signs of inflammation and with actually stable marginal bone levels (MBLs) over the investigation period. In general, MBLs were stable with medians (interquartile ranges) of 0.13 (0.78) mm and 0.08 (1.2) mm, for TG and CG, without significant intergroup differences. Crown-to-implant ratio showed a highly significant intergroup difference of 1.06 ± 0.18 mm and 0.73 ± 0.17 mm ( < 0.001). Few technical complications (i.e., screw loosening or chipping) were registered during the investigation period. In conclusion, given stringent professional maintenance, short dental implants with single-crown restorations show a slightly worse but statistically not different survival rate after 10 y, especially in the lower jaw, but can still be considered a valuable alternative, especially when vertical bone dimensions are limited (German Clinical Trials Registry: DRKS00006290).
本研究旨在比较短种植体(6 毫米试验组,TG)和长种植体(10 毫米对照组,CG)在 10 年负载后,用单冠修复的临床和影像学结果。需要在后颌单牙置换的患者被随机分配到 TG 或 CG。种植体在 10 周的愈合期后用螺丝固位的单冠加载。随访预约每年安排一次,包括患者适应的口腔卫生再指导以及所有牙齿和种植体的抛光。10 年后,再次评估临床和影像学参数。最初的 94 名患者(TG 和 CG 各 47 名)中,有 70 名(TG 36 名,CG 34 名)可以重新评估。存活率分别为 85.7%(TG)和 97.1%(CG),两组间无显著差异(=0.072)。除 1 个丢失的种植体外,所有种植体均位于下颌。这些种植体的丢失不是由于种植体周围炎,而是由于骨整合的晚期丢失,没有炎症迹象,实际上在整个研究期间边缘骨水平(MBL)稳定。总的来说,MBL 是稳定的,TG 的中位数(四分位距)为 0.13(0.78)mm,CG 的中位数为 0.08(1.2)mm,两组间无显著差异。冠-种植体比有显著的组间差异,分别为 1.06±0.18mm 和 0.73±0.17mm(<0.001)。在研究期间,仅记录到少数技术并发症(即螺丝松动或碎裂)。总之,在严格的专业维护下,用单冠修复的短种植体在 10 年后的存活率略差,但统计学上无差异,尤其是在下颌,但仍可被视为一种有价值的替代方法,尤其是在垂直骨尺寸有限时(德国临床试验注册中心:DRKS00006290)。