Single crowns in the posterior maxilla supported by either 11‐mm long implants with sinus floor augmentation or by 6‐mm long implants: A 10‐year randomized controlled trial

• Published in: Clinical oral implants research Vol. 35; no. 1; pp. 89 - 100
• Main Authors: Guljé, Felix L., Raghoebar, Gerry M., Gareb, Barzi, Vissink, Arjan, Meijer, Henny J. A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Denmark Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.01.2024
• Subjects: Bone loss; clinical research; clinical trials; Crowns; Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Prosthesis Design; Dental prosthetics; Dental Restoration Failure; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Maxilla - diagnostic imaging; Maxilla - surgery; Maxillary sinus; Mechanical loading; Patients; short dental implants; Sinus Floor Augmentation; Treatment Outcome; clinical research; short dental implants; clinical trials
• DOI: 10.1111/clr.14200
• ISSN: 0905-7161; 1600-0501

Objectives To compare the clinical performance of single crowns in the posterior maxilla supported by either 11‐mm long implants combined with maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) surgery or by 6‐mm long implants during a 10‐year follow‐up period. Materials and Methods Subjects were randomly allocated to receive one 11‐mm long implant in combination MFSA or to receive one 6‐mm long implant without any grafting. Twenty‐one implants in 20 patients were placed in the 6‐mm group and 20 implants in 18 patients were placed in the 11‐mm group. Both groups were followed by clinical and radiographic examinations up to 10 years. Patients' satisfaction was also scored before treatment. Results Two patients died and eight patients moved during the follow‐up. Two patients lost an implant in the 6‐mm group and one implant was lost in the 11‐mm group (implant survival 89.5% and 90.9%, respectively). From loading to 10 years' follow‐up, mean ± SE marginal bone loss in the 6‐mm group and 11‐mm group was 0.18 ± 0.10 mm and 0.26 ± 0.12 mm, respectively, without a significant difference between the groups at 10 years (p = .650). In both groups, indices scores for plaque, calculus, gingiva and bleeding were low as well as mean pocket probing depth. Patients' satisfaction at 10 years was high in both groups; mean overall satisfaction in the 6‐mm group and 11‐mm group was 9.6 ± 0.6 and 9.2 ± 0.8, respectively (p = .168). Conclusions Placement of 6‐mm implants or 11‐mm implants combined MFSA are equally successful during a 10‐year follow‐up period when applied for supporting a single restoration.