Short dental implants versus standard dental implants placed in the posterior jaws: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: The purpose of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare short implants (equal or less than 8 mm) versus standard implants (larger than 8 mm) placed in posterior regions of maxilla and mandible, evaluating survival rates of implants, marginal bone loss, complications and prosthesis failures. Data: This review has been registered at PROSPERO under the number CRD42015016588. Main search terms were used in combination: dental implant, short implant, short dental implants, short dental implants posterior, short dental implants maxilla, and short dental implants mandible. Source: An electronic search for data published up until September/2015 was undertaken using the PubMed/Medline, Embase and The Cochrane Library databases. Study selection: Eligibility criteria included clinical human studies, randomized controlled trials and/or prospective studies, which evaluated short implants in comparison to standard implants in the same study. Conclusion: The search identified 1460 references, after inclusion criteria 13 studies were assessed for eligibility. A total of 1269 patients, who had received a total of 2631 dental implants. The results showed that there was no significant difference of implants survival (P =.24; RR: 1.35; CI: 0.82-2.22), marginal bone loss (P =.06; MD: -0.20; CI: -0.41 to 0.00), complications (P =.08; RR: 0.54; CI: 0.27-1.09) and prosthesis failures (P =.92; RR: 0.96; CI: 0.44-2.09). Short implants are considered a predictable treatment for posterior jaws. However, short implants with length less than 8 mm (4-7 mm) should be used with caution because they present greater risks to failures compared to standard implants. (C) 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd.