Presentation Information
[P-63（E）]Comparative anlysis of long-term clinical outcomes of short and long implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
*Yuxin Pei1,2, Meihua Li1,2 (1. Department of Stomatology, Second Hospital of Jilin University, 2. The Second Clinical Medical College of Jilin University)
[Objective]
This systematic review and meta-analysis investigate the long-termcinical outcomes of short implants (SI) compared to long implants (LI).
[Method]
The protocol of the meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO(CRD42023479071). Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive search through PubMed, Web of science and Embase databases up to August 2024. Primary outcome is survival rate of implants over 5-10 years follow-up, marginal bone loss and complication rate as secondary outcomes.
[Results and Discussion]
Sixteen RCTs were included, of which four had up to 10 years of follow-up. Meta-analysis results indicate that SI had a lower survival rate compared to LI (RR=0.97, p<0.05). Correspondingly, SI was more likely to exhibited prosthesis failure(RR=2.13, p<0.05). In addition, SI were associated with less marginal bone loss, incidence of technical and biological complications did not differ significantly between implant lengths. In brief, SI display a slightly reduced survival rate compared to LI over long-term follow-ups, and the latter should be prioritized when there is sufficient bone height.
This systematic review and meta-analysis investigate the long-termcinical outcomes of short implants (SI) compared to long implants (LI).
[Method]
The protocol of the meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO(CRD42023479071). Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive search through PubMed, Web of science and Embase databases up to August 2024. Primary outcome is survival rate of implants over 5-10 years follow-up, marginal bone loss and complication rate as secondary outcomes.
[Results and Discussion]
Sixteen RCTs were included, of which four had up to 10 years of follow-up. Meta-analysis results indicate that SI had a lower survival rate compared to LI (RR=0.97, p<0.05). Correspondingly, SI was more likely to exhibited prosthesis failure(RR=2.13, p<0.05). In addition, SI were associated with less marginal bone loss, incidence of technical and biological complications did not differ significantly between implant lengths. In brief, SI display a slightly reduced survival rate compared to LI over long-term follow-ups, and the latter should be prioritized when there is sufficient bone height.
