Loading…

Short dental implants: A scoping review of the literature for patients with head and neck cancer

Dental implants can be essential in the rehabilitation of various cancer defects, but their ideal placement can be complicated by the limited dimensions of the available host bone. Surgical interventions developed to increase the amount of bone are not all predictable or successful and can sometimes...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of prosthetic dentistry 2018-05, Vol.119 (5), p.736-742
Main Authors: Edher, Faraj, Nguyen, Caroline T.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Dental implants can be essential in the rehabilitation of various cancer defects, but their ideal placement can be complicated by the limited dimensions of the available host bone. Surgical interventions developed to increase the amount of bone are not all predictable or successful and can sometimes be contraindicated. Short dental implants have been suggested as an alternative option in sites where longer implants are not possible. Whether they provide a successful treatment option is unclear. The purpose of this study was to review the literature on short dental implants and assess whether they are a viable definitive treatment option for rehabilitating cancer patients with deficient bone. A scoping review of the literature was performed, including a search of established periodontal textbooks for articles on short dental implants combined with a search of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. A search for all literature published before June 2016 was based on the following keywords: [‘dental implants’ OR ‘dental implantation, endosseous’ OR ‘dental prosthesis, implant supported’] AND [short]. The minimum acceptable implant length has been considered to be 6 mm. The survival rates of short implants varied between 74% and 96% at 5 years, depending on factors such as the quality of the patient’s bone, primary stability of the implant, clinician’s learning curve, and implant surface. Short implants can achieve results similar to those of longer implants in augmented bone and offer a treatment alternative that could reduce the need for invasive surgery and associated morbidity and be safer and more economical. Short dental implants (6 mm to 8 mm) can be used successfully to support single or multiple fixed reconstructions or overdentures in atrophic maxillae and mandibles. The use of short dental implants lessens the need for advanced and complicated surgical bone augmentation procedures, which reduces complications, costs, treatment time, and morbidity. Short implants could be an alternative in the rehabilitation of patients with cancer.
ISSN:0022-3913
1097-6841
DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.06.003