AIM To test whether or not the use of short dental implants (6 mm) results in an implant survival rate similar to long implants (11-15 mm) in combination with sinus grafting. METHODS This multicentre study enrolled 101 patients with a posterior maxillary bone height of 5-7 mm. Patients randomly received short implants (6 mm) (group short) or long implants (11-15 mm) with sinus grafting (group graft). Six months later, implants were loaded with single crowns and patients re-examined at 1 year of loading. Outcomes included treatment time, price calculations, safety, patient-reported outcome measures (OHIP-49 = Oral Health Impact Profile) and implant survival. Statistical analysis was performed using a non-parametric approach. RESULTS In 101 patients, 137 implants were placed. Mean surgical time was 52.6 min. (group short) and 74.6 min. (group graft). Mean costs amounted to 941EUR (group short) and 1946EUR (group graft). Mean severity scores between suture removal and baseline revealed a statistically significant decrease for most OHIP dimensions in group graft only. At 1 year, 97 patients with 132 implants were re-examined. The implant survival rate was 100%. CONCLUSIONS Both treatment modalities can be considered suitable for implant therapy in the atrophied posterior maxilla. Short implants may be more favourable regarding short-term patient morbidity, treatment time and price. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12323Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich ZORA URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-107953 Accepted Version Originally published at: Thoma, Daniel S; Haas, Robert; Tutak, Marcin; Garcia, Abel; Schincaglia, Gian Pietro; Hämmerle, Christoph H F (2015). Randomized controlled multicentre study comparing short dental implants (6 mm) versus longer dental implants (11-15 mm) in combination with sinus floor elevation procedures. CLINICAL RELEVANCEScientific rationale for the study: implant therapy in the posterior maxilla with a limited ridge height presents challenges to the clinician. At present, a sinus floor elevation procedure to increase the ridge height in combination with the placement of long dental implants is considered the gold standard. In order to overcome limitations and disadvantages associated with this procedure, the use of shorter dental implants has been proposed to avoid extensive bone augmentation surgeriesPrincipal findings: Both treatment options, sinus floor elevation with long implants and short implants rendered similar outcomes at 1 year of function with respect to implant survival rates. Treatment costs, surgical time and physical disability at the day of suture removal were lower for the group with short dental implants. Practical implications:Within the limitations of this study both treatment options can be recommended for the severely atrophied posterior maxilla. 4ABSTRACT Aim: to test whether or not the use of short dental implants (6mm) results in an implant survival rate similar to long implants (11-15mm) in combination with sinus grafti...

The immediate loading of two implants by means of ball attachment-retained mandibular complete denture may be a predictable treatment option. This clinical approach offers increased stability and comfort, while keeping a high implant success rate.

When combined with rhPDGF-BB and β-TCP, the SFA may result in similar clinical outcomes, better quality of early wound healing, and lower pain and consumption of analgesics during the first postoperative days compared to the DFA.

The surgical debridement of intraosseous periodontal defects resulted in comparable, substantial CAL gains and PD reductions as well as limited postoperative REC increases when defects were accessed with the SFA or DFA.