Objectives: Whilst caution in the use of small diameter (≤ 3.5mm) implants has been advocated in view of an increased risk of fatigue fracture under clinical loading conditions, a variety of implant designs with diameters < 3mm are currently offered to the market for reconstructions including fixed restorations.There is an absence of reported laboratory studies and randomized controlled clinical trials to demonstrate clinical efficacy for implant designs with small diameters. This laboratory study aimed to provide comparative data on the mechanical performance of a number of narrow commercially marketed implants. Materials and methods: Conclusions:The diameters of the commercially available implants tested had a major impact on their ability to withstand load, with those below 3mm diameter yielding results significantly below a value representing a risk of fracture in clinical practice. The results therefore support caution when considering the applicability of implants ≤ 3mm diameter for single tooth and FPD restorations. Standardized fatigue testing reports for commercially available implants is recommended.

No abstract