EAO Supplement Working Group 4 – EAO CC 2015 Short implants versus sinus lifting with longer implants to restore the posterior maxilla: a systematic review
Abstract
Objective
To compare short implants in the posterior maxilla to longer implants placed after or simultaneously with sinus floor elevation procedures. The focused question was as follows: Are short implants superior to longer implants in the augmented sinus in terms of survival and complication rates of implants and reconstructions, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and costs?
Methods
A MEDLINE search (1990–2014) was performed for randomized controlled clinical studies comparing short implants (≤8 mm) to longer implants (>8 mm) in augmented sinus. The search was complimented by an additional hand search of the selected papers and reviews published between 2011 and 2014. Eligible studies were selected based on the inclusion criteria, and quality assessments were conducted. Descriptive statistics were applied for a number of outcome measures. Survival rates of dental implants were pooled simply in case of comparable studies.
Results
Eight randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) comparing short implants versus longer implants in the augmented sinus derived from an initial search count of 851 titles were selected and data extracted. In general, all studies were well conducted with a low risk of bias for the majority of the analyzed parameters. Based on the pooled analyses of longer follow-ups (5 studies, 16–18 months), the survival rate of longer implants amounted to 99.5% (95% CI: 97.6–99.98%) and for shorter implants to 99.0% (95% CI: 96.4–99.8%). For shorter follow-ups (3 studies, 8–9 months), the survival rates of longer implants are 100% (95% CI: 97.1–100%) and for shorter implants 98.2% (95% CI: 93.9–99.7%). Complications were predominantly of biological origin, mainly occurred intraoperatively as membrane perforations, and were almost three times as higher for longer implant in the augmented sinus compared to shorter implants. PROMs, morbidity, surgical time and costs were generally in favor of shorter dental implants. All studies were performed by surgeons in specialized clinical settings.
Conclusions
The outcomes of the survey analyses demonstrated predictably high implant survival rates for short implants and longer implants placed in augmented sinus and their respective reconstructions. Given the higher number of biological complications, increased morbidity, costs and surgical time of longer dental implants in the augmented sinus, shorter dental implants may represent the preferred treatment alternative.
