Reabilitação com implantes curtos e extracurtos em substituição aos convencionais em áreas enxertadas
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Publicado
Mar 5, 2025
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Resumo
Objetivo: Analisar a utilização de implantes curtos e extracurtos ao invés de implantes padrões e longos (convencionais) com cirurgias de regeneração óssea prévia, auxiliando o cirurgião-dentista na escolha do plano de tratamento mais adequado ao reabilitar regiões posteriores atróficas de maxila e mandíbula. Revisão bibliográfica: A reabilitação das áreas posteriores atróficas de maxila e mandíbula sempre se apresenta como um grande desafio para a implantodontia. Isto porque a altura vertical dos rebordos alveolares posteriores encontra-se insuficiente, pela reabsorção óssea pós perda dentária, para receber implantes convencionais sem cirurgias prévias para aquisição do suporte ósseo imprescindível. Implantes curtos e extracurtos surgiram pela necessidade de evitar tais procedimentos, que são custosos, complexos, demorados e com morbidade pós-cirúrgica. Considerações finais: A literatura aponta que a reabilitação com implantes mais curtos ou convencionais (com cirurgia prévia) apresentam resultados semelhantes, indicando ao profissional reabilitador que implantes curtos e extracurtos também podem ser opções viáveis nas regiões atróficas posteriores. Cabe ao cirurgião-dentista decidir, de acordo com o quadro clínico do paciente, qual a melhor opção para cada caso especificamente.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Como Citar
FilgueirasA., PintoD. G., FerrarezL. L., ResendeL. M. de, OliveiraA. E. M. de, & Sotto-MaiorB. S. (2025). Reabilitação com implantes curtos e extracurtos em substituição aos convencionais em áreas enxertadas. Revista Eletrônica Acervo Saúde, 25, e20104. https://doi.org/10.25248/reas.e20104.2025
Seção
Revisão Bibliográfica
Copyright © | Todos os direitos reservados.
A revista detém os direitos autorais exclusivos de publicação deste artigo nos termos da lei 9610/98.
Reprodução parcial
É livre o uso de partes do texto, figuras e questionário do artigo, sendo obrigatória a citação dos autores e revista.
Reprodução total
É expressamente proibida, devendo ser autorizada pela revista.
Referências
1. AL-JOHANY SS, et al. Dental Implant Length and Diameter: A Proposed Classification Scheme. J Prosthodont, 2016; 26(3): 252-260.
2. AMINE M, et al. Short implants (5-8 mm) vs. longimplants in augmented boné and their impact on peri-implant bone in maxila and/or mandible: Systematic review. J Stomatol Oral Maxillo fac Surg, 2018; 119(6): 455-462.
3. ANITUA E, et al. Clinical Performance of Extra-Short (≤5.5 mm) Compared to Longer Implants Splinted under the Same Prosthesis: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Dent J (Basel), 2024; 12(9): 292.
4. ANNIBALI S, et al. Short dental implants: a systematic review. J Dent Res, 2012; 91(1): 25-32.
5. ATTARD NJ e ZARB GA. Implant prosth odontic management of part iallye dentulous patients missing posterior teeth: the Toronto experience. J Prosthet Dent, 2003; 89(4): 352-9.
6. BUSER D, et al. Tissue integration of non-submerged implants: 1-year results of a prospective study with 100 ITI hollow-cylinder and hollow-screw implants. Clin Oral Implants Res, 1990; 1: 33-40.
7. DE CASTRO D, et al. Comparative histological and histomorphometrical evaluation of marginal boné resorption around external hexagon and Morse cone implants: an experimental study in dogs. Implant Dent, 2014; 23(3): 270-6.
8. FELICE P, et al. Posterior atrophic jaws rehabilitated with prostheses supported by 6-mm-long 4-mm-wide implants or by longer implants in augmented bone. Five-year post-loading results from a within-person randomised controlled trial. Int J Oral Implantol (Berl), 2019; 12(1): 57-72.
9. FERNANDES GVO, et al. Comparative analysis between extra-short implants (≤6 mm) and 6-mm-longer implants: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Aust Dent J, 2022; 1-18.
10. GASTALDI G, et al. Posterior atrophic jaws rehabilitated with prostheses supported by 5 × 5 mm implants with a nano structured calcium-incorporated titanium surface or by longer implants in augmented bone: 3-year results from a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Oral Implantol, 2018; 11(1): 49–61.
11. GRIFFIN TJ e CHEUNG WS. The use of short, wide implants in posterior areas with reduced one height: A retrospective investigation. J Prosthet Dent, 2004; 92(2):139-144.
12. JEPSEN S, et al. Regenerationof alveolar ridgedefects: Consensus reportofgroup 4 ofthe 15th European Workshop on Periodontology on Bone Regeneration. J Clin Periodontol, 2019; 46(21): 277–286.
13. LEMOS CAA, et al. Short dental implants versus standard dental implants placed in the posterior jaws: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent, 2016; 47: 8-17.
14. LEONG DJ, et al. Comparison between sandwich boné augmentation and all ogenic block graft for vertical ridge augmentation in the posterior mandible. Implant Dent, 2015; 24(1): 4-12.
15. LIZIO G, et al. Posterior jaws rehabilitation with< 7mm-short implants. A review. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2022; 123(3): 45-56.
16. MAGDY M, et al. Ultra-short versus standard-length dental implants in conjunction with osteotome-mediated sinus floor elevation: A randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2021; 1–10.
17. MENEZES DJ, et al. Effect of platelet-rich plasma in alveolar distraction osteogenesis: a controlled clinical trial. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2016; 54(1): 83-7.
18. MERLI M, et al. A minimally invasive technique for lateral maxillary sinus floor elevation: a Bayesian network study. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2014; 1–9.
19. MESTER A, et al. Short implants versus standard implants and sinus floor elevation in atrophic posterior maxilla: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials with ≥5 years’ follow-up. J Pers Med, 2023; 13(2): 169.
20. MISCH CE. Short dental implants: A literature review and rationale for use. Dent Today, 2005; 24(8): 64-68.
21. NISAND D e RENOUARD F. Short implant in limited bone volume. Periodontol 2000, 2014; 66(1): 72-96.
22. PAPASPYRIDAKOS P, et al. Survival rates of short dental implants (≤6 mm) compared with implants longer than 6 mm in posterior jaw areas: A meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2018; 29(16): 8-20.
23. PEIXOTO HE, et al. Rehabilitation of the atrophic mandible with short implants in diferente positions: a finite elements study. MaterSciEng C Mater Biol Appl, 2017; 80: 122-128.
24. PEREIRA JPV, et al. Comparative clinical study using short and conventional implants in bilateral jaw posteriors. Braz Dent J, 2020; 31(4): 368-373.
25. PIMENTEL AC, et al. LateralizationTechnique and Inferior Alveolar NerveTransposition. Case Rep Dent, 2016; 4802637.
26. QIN S e GAO Z. Comparative evaluation of short or standard implants with diferente prosthetic designs in the posterior mandibular region: a three-dimensional finite element analysis study. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin, 2023; 26(12):1499-1509.
27. SCHWARTZ SR. Short implants: An answer to a challenging dilemma? Dent Clin North Am, 2020; 64(2): 253-268.
28. SHAH SN, et al. Canextra-short dental implants serve as alternatives to bone augmentation? A preliminary longitudinal randomized controlled clinical trial. Quintessence Int, 2018; 49(8): 635-643.
29. TANG C, et al. Simultaneous placement of short implants (≤8 mm) versus standard length implants (≥10 mm) after sinus floor elevation in atrophic posterior maxillae: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Implant Dent, 2022; 8: 45.
30. THOMA DS, et al. Treatment concepts for the posterior maxila and mandible: short implants versus long implants in augmented bone. J Periodontal Implant Sci, 2017; 47(1): 2-12.
31. WEERAPONG K, et al. Comparative study of immediat elo adingon short dental implants and conventional dental implants in the posterior mandible: A randomizedclinicaltrial. Int J Oral Maxillo fac Implants, 2019; 34(1): 141-149.
32. WENG D, et al. A prospective multi center clinical trial of 3i machined-surface implants: results after 6 years of follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillo fac Implants, 2003; 18(3): 417-23.
33. XU X, et al. Short versus standard implants for single-crown restorations in the posterior region: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent, 2020; 124(5): 530-538.
34. YANG J, et al. Augmentation of the alveolar ridge compared with shorter implants in atrophic jaws: a meta-analysis base don randomised controll edtrials. Br J Oral Maxillo fac Surg, 2016; 54(9): 1125-1133.
35. ZADEH HH, et al. Marginal boné level and survival of short and standard-length implants after 3 years: An open multi-centerr and omized controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2018; 1–13.
2. AMINE M, et al. Short implants (5-8 mm) vs. longimplants in augmented boné and their impact on peri-implant bone in maxila and/or mandible: Systematic review. J Stomatol Oral Maxillo fac Surg, 2018; 119(6): 455-462.
3. ANITUA E, et al. Clinical Performance of Extra-Short (≤5.5 mm) Compared to Longer Implants Splinted under the Same Prosthesis: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Dent J (Basel), 2024; 12(9): 292.
4. ANNIBALI S, et al. Short dental implants: a systematic review. J Dent Res, 2012; 91(1): 25-32.
5. ATTARD NJ e ZARB GA. Implant prosth odontic management of part iallye dentulous patients missing posterior teeth: the Toronto experience. J Prosthet Dent, 2003; 89(4): 352-9.
6. BUSER D, et al. Tissue integration of non-submerged implants: 1-year results of a prospective study with 100 ITI hollow-cylinder and hollow-screw implants. Clin Oral Implants Res, 1990; 1: 33-40.
7. DE CASTRO D, et al. Comparative histological and histomorphometrical evaluation of marginal boné resorption around external hexagon and Morse cone implants: an experimental study in dogs. Implant Dent, 2014; 23(3): 270-6.
8. FELICE P, et al. Posterior atrophic jaws rehabilitated with prostheses supported by 6-mm-long 4-mm-wide implants or by longer implants in augmented bone. Five-year post-loading results from a within-person randomised controlled trial. Int J Oral Implantol (Berl), 2019; 12(1): 57-72.
9. FERNANDES GVO, et al. Comparative analysis between extra-short implants (≤6 mm) and 6-mm-longer implants: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Aust Dent J, 2022; 1-18.
10. GASTALDI G, et al. Posterior atrophic jaws rehabilitated with prostheses supported by 5 × 5 mm implants with a nano structured calcium-incorporated titanium surface or by longer implants in augmented bone: 3-year results from a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Oral Implantol, 2018; 11(1): 49–61.
11. GRIFFIN TJ e CHEUNG WS. The use of short, wide implants in posterior areas with reduced one height: A retrospective investigation. J Prosthet Dent, 2004; 92(2):139-144.
12. JEPSEN S, et al. Regenerationof alveolar ridgedefects: Consensus reportofgroup 4 ofthe 15th European Workshop on Periodontology on Bone Regeneration. J Clin Periodontol, 2019; 46(21): 277–286.
13. LEMOS CAA, et al. Short dental implants versus standard dental implants placed in the posterior jaws: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent, 2016; 47: 8-17.
14. LEONG DJ, et al. Comparison between sandwich boné augmentation and all ogenic block graft for vertical ridge augmentation in the posterior mandible. Implant Dent, 2015; 24(1): 4-12.
15. LIZIO G, et al. Posterior jaws rehabilitation with< 7mm-short implants. A review. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2022; 123(3): 45-56.
16. MAGDY M, et al. Ultra-short versus standard-length dental implants in conjunction with osteotome-mediated sinus floor elevation: A randomized controlled clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2021; 1–10.
17. MENEZES DJ, et al. Effect of platelet-rich plasma in alveolar distraction osteogenesis: a controlled clinical trial. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2016; 54(1): 83-7.
18. MERLI M, et al. A minimally invasive technique for lateral maxillary sinus floor elevation: a Bayesian network study. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2014; 1–9.
19. MESTER A, et al. Short implants versus standard implants and sinus floor elevation in atrophic posterior maxilla: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials with ≥5 years’ follow-up. J Pers Med, 2023; 13(2): 169.
20. MISCH CE. Short dental implants: A literature review and rationale for use. Dent Today, 2005; 24(8): 64-68.
21. NISAND D e RENOUARD F. Short implant in limited bone volume. Periodontol 2000, 2014; 66(1): 72-96.
22. PAPASPYRIDAKOS P, et al. Survival rates of short dental implants (≤6 mm) compared with implants longer than 6 mm in posterior jaw areas: A meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2018; 29(16): 8-20.
23. PEIXOTO HE, et al. Rehabilitation of the atrophic mandible with short implants in diferente positions: a finite elements study. MaterSciEng C Mater Biol Appl, 2017; 80: 122-128.
24. PEREIRA JPV, et al. Comparative clinical study using short and conventional implants in bilateral jaw posteriors. Braz Dent J, 2020; 31(4): 368-373.
25. PIMENTEL AC, et al. LateralizationTechnique and Inferior Alveolar NerveTransposition. Case Rep Dent, 2016; 4802637.
26. QIN S e GAO Z. Comparative evaluation of short or standard implants with diferente prosthetic designs in the posterior mandibular region: a three-dimensional finite element analysis study. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin, 2023; 26(12):1499-1509.
27. SCHWARTZ SR. Short implants: An answer to a challenging dilemma? Dent Clin North Am, 2020; 64(2): 253-268.
28. SHAH SN, et al. Canextra-short dental implants serve as alternatives to bone augmentation? A preliminary longitudinal randomized controlled clinical trial. Quintessence Int, 2018; 49(8): 635-643.
29. TANG C, et al. Simultaneous placement of short implants (≤8 mm) versus standard length implants (≥10 mm) after sinus floor elevation in atrophic posterior maxillae: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Implant Dent, 2022; 8: 45.
30. THOMA DS, et al. Treatment concepts for the posterior maxila and mandible: short implants versus long implants in augmented bone. J Periodontal Implant Sci, 2017; 47(1): 2-12.
31. WEERAPONG K, et al. Comparative study of immediat elo adingon short dental implants and conventional dental implants in the posterior mandible: A randomizedclinicaltrial. Int J Oral Maxillo fac Implants, 2019; 34(1): 141-149.
32. WENG D, et al. A prospective multi center clinical trial of 3i machined-surface implants: results after 6 years of follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillo fac Implants, 2003; 18(3): 417-23.
33. XU X, et al. Short versus standard implants for single-crown restorations in the posterior region: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent, 2020; 124(5): 530-538.
34. YANG J, et al. Augmentation of the alveolar ridge compared with shorter implants in atrophic jaws: a meta-analysis base don randomised controll edtrials. Br J Oral Maxillo fac Surg, 2016; 54(9): 1125-1133.
35. ZADEH HH, et al. Marginal boné level and survival of short and standard-length implants after 3 years: An open multi-centerr and omized controlled clinical trial. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2018; 1–13.