Google Académico | Citações: 16429 | índice h: 32 | índice i10: 482
Rehabilitación con implantes cortos y extracortos reemplazando implantes convencionales en áreas injertadas
PDF (portugués (Brasil))

Palabras clave

Implantes dentales
Injertos hueso
Maxilares

Cómo citar

Rehabilitación con implantes cortos y extracortos reemplazando implantes convencionales en áreas injertadas. (2025). Revista Eletrônica Acervo Saúde, 25, e20104. https://doi.org/10.25248/reas.e20104.2025

Copyright © | Todos los derechos reservados.

La revista posee los derechos de autor exclusivos para la publicación de este artículo en los términos de la ley brasileña 9610/98.

Reproducción parcial
El uso de partes de los textos, figuras y cuestionario del artículo es libre, siendo obligatoria la citación de los autores y revista.

Reproducción total
Está expresamente prohibido y debe ser autorizado por la revista.

Resumen

Objetivo: Analizar el uso de implantes cortos y extracortos en lugar de implantes estándar y largos (convencionales) con cirugías de regeneración ósea previas, ayudando al dentista a elegir el plan de tratamiento más adecuado al rehabilitar regiones posteriores atróficas del maxilar y la mandíbula. Revisión bibliográfica: La rehabilitación de zonas posteriores atróficas del maxilar y mandíbula presenta siempre un gran desafío para la implantología. Esto se debe a que la altura vertical de las crestas alveolares posteriores es insuficiente, debido a la reabsorción ósea tras la pérdida dentaria, para recibir implantes convencionales sin una cirugía previa para adquirir el soporte óseo imprescindible. Los implantes cortos y extracortos surgieron por la necesidad de evitar este tipo de procedimientos, que son costosos, complejos, prolongados y con morbilidad postquirúrgica. Consideraciones finales: La literatura indica que la rehabilitación con implantes más cortos o convencionales (con cirugía previa) presenta resultados similares, indicando al profesional de la rehabilitación que los implantes cortos y extracortos también son opciones viables en regiones atróficas posteriores. Corresponde al odontólogo decidir, según el estado clínico del paciente, cuál es la mejor opción para cada caso concreto.

PDF (portugués (Brasil))

Referencias

AL-JOHANY SS, et al. Dental Implant Length and Diameter: A Proposed Classification Scheme. J Prosthodont, 2016; 26(3): 252-260.

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.

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.

ANNIBALI S, et al. Short dental implants: a systematic review. J Dent Res, 2012; 91(1): 25-32.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

LIZIO G, et al. Posterior jaws rehabilitation with< 7mm-short implants. A review. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2022; 123(3): 45-56.

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.

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.

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.

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.

MISCH CE. Short dental implants: A literature review and rationale for use. Dent Today, 2005; 24(8): 64-68.

NISAND D e RENOUARD F. Short implant in limited bone volume. Periodontol 2000, 2014; 66(1): 72-96.

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.

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.

PEREIRA JPV, et al. Comparative clinical study using short and conventional implants in bilateral jaw posteriors. Braz Dent J, 2020; 31(4): 368-373.

PIMENTEL AC, et al. LateralizationTechnique and Inferior Alveolar NerveTransposition. Case Rep Dent, 2016; 4802637.

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.

SCHWARTZ SR. Short implants: An answer to a challenging dilemma? Dent Clin North Am, 2020; 64(2): 253-268.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.