Outcomes of placing short implants in the posterior mandible: A preliminary randomized controlled trial

Background Short dental implants can be an alternative to bone augmentation procedures at sites of reduced alveolar bone. Most studies on short implants are retrospective or multicentre reports that lack controlled and consistent comparison between different systems. This study aimed to compare clin...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Al-Hashedi, A.A., Taiyeb-Ali, T.B., Yunus, N.
Format: Article
Published: Wiley 2016
Subjects:
Online Access:http://eprints.um.edu.my/18216/
https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12337
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Universiti Malaya
id my.um.eprints.18216
record_format eprints
spelling my.um.eprints.182162017-11-10T04:04:53Z http://eprints.um.edu.my/18216/ Outcomes of placing short implants in the posterior mandible: A preliminary randomized controlled trial Al-Hashedi, A.A. Taiyeb-Ali, T.B. Yunus, N. RK Dentistry Background Short dental implants can be an alternative to bone augmentation procedures at sites of reduced alveolar bone. Most studies on short implants are retrospective or multicentre reports that lack controlled and consistent comparison between different systems. This study aimed to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of short implants in two different systems in the posterior mandible. Methods Twenty patients with two adjacent missing posterior teeth were recruited. Patients were assigned equally and randomly into two groups; Bicon® (6 or 8 mm) and Ankylos® (8 mm) implants. A two-stage surgical approach and single crowns were used for implant placement and loading. Outcomes included peri-implant clinical parameters, implant stability (Periotest values; PTVs) and peri-implant bone changes, which were assessed at baseline, 2, 6 and 12 months post-loading. Results No implant loss was encountered up to 12 months post-loading. No significant difference in the clinical or radiographic parameters was observed except for PTVs (p < 0.05) that was lower in Ankylos® implants. Conclusions The use of short dental implants was associated with excellent 12 months clinical and radiographic outcomes. Ankylos® and Bicon® implants demonstrated similar peri-implant soft tissue and alveolar bone changes. However, Ankylos® implants demonstrated better implant stability at all evaluation intervals. Wiley 2016 Article PeerReviewed Al-Hashedi, A.A. and Taiyeb-Ali, T.B. and Yunus, N. (2016) Outcomes of placing short implants in the posterior mandible: A preliminary randomized controlled trial. Australian Dental Journal, 61 (2). pp. 208-218. ISSN 0045-0421 https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12337 doi:10.1111/adj.12337
institution Universiti Malaya
building UM Library
collection Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
content_provider Universiti Malaya
content_source UM Research Repository
url_provider http://eprints.um.edu.my/
topic RK Dentistry
spellingShingle RK Dentistry
Al-Hashedi, A.A.
Taiyeb-Ali, T.B.
Yunus, N.
Outcomes of placing short implants in the posterior mandible: A preliminary randomized controlled trial
description Background Short dental implants can be an alternative to bone augmentation procedures at sites of reduced alveolar bone. Most studies on short implants are retrospective or multicentre reports that lack controlled and consistent comparison between different systems. This study aimed to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of short implants in two different systems in the posterior mandible. Methods Twenty patients with two adjacent missing posterior teeth were recruited. Patients were assigned equally and randomly into two groups; Bicon® (6 or 8 mm) and Ankylos® (8 mm) implants. A two-stage surgical approach and single crowns were used for implant placement and loading. Outcomes included peri-implant clinical parameters, implant stability (Periotest values; PTVs) and peri-implant bone changes, which were assessed at baseline, 2, 6 and 12 months post-loading. Results No implant loss was encountered up to 12 months post-loading. No significant difference in the clinical or radiographic parameters was observed except for PTVs (p < 0.05) that was lower in Ankylos® implants. Conclusions The use of short dental implants was associated with excellent 12 months clinical and radiographic outcomes. Ankylos® and Bicon® implants demonstrated similar peri-implant soft tissue and alveolar bone changes. However, Ankylos® implants demonstrated better implant stability at all evaluation intervals.
format Article
author Al-Hashedi, A.A.
Taiyeb-Ali, T.B.
Yunus, N.
author_facet Al-Hashedi, A.A.
Taiyeb-Ali, T.B.
Yunus, N.
author_sort Al-Hashedi, A.A.
title Outcomes of placing short implants in the posterior mandible: A preliminary randomized controlled trial
title_short Outcomes of placing short implants in the posterior mandible: A preliminary randomized controlled trial
title_full Outcomes of placing short implants in the posterior mandible: A preliminary randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Outcomes of placing short implants in the posterior mandible: A preliminary randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Outcomes of placing short implants in the posterior mandible: A preliminary randomized controlled trial
title_sort outcomes of placing short implants in the posterior mandible: a preliminary randomized controlled trial
publisher Wiley
publishDate 2016
url http://eprints.um.edu.my/18216/
https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.12337
_version_ 1643690643086639104