SynthesisBMJ open2019
Short implants (≤6 mm) versus longer implants with sinus floor elevation in atrophic posterior maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07627633 (Efficacy of Adjunctive Theravex Tissue Care® With Xenograft Using Osseodensification in Internal Sinus Lifting), which is not on this map. Cited by 20 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Efficacy of Adjunctive Theravex Tissue Care® With Xenograft Using Osseodensification in Internal Sinus Lifting: a Randomized Controlled Clinical Study
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical performance of short implants vs. standard implants in edentulous patients. An umbrella review.Frontiers in oral health · 2025Pooled it
- A network meta-analysis comparing treatment modalities of short and long implants in the posterior maxilla with insufficient bone height.BMC oral health · 2024Pooled it
- Clinical performance of additively manufactured subperiosteal implants: a systematic review.International journal of implant dentistry · 2024Pooled it
- Short versus standard implants at sinus augmented sites: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical oral investigations · 2022Pooled it
- The survival rate of transcrestal sinus floor elevation combined with short implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.International journal of implant dentistry · 2021Pooled it
- A meta-analysis indicating extra-short implants (≤ 6 mm) as an alternative to longer implants (≥ 8 mm) with bone augmentation.Scientific reports · 2021Pooled it
- The rehabilitation of posterior atrophic maxilla by using the graftless option of short implant versus conventional long implant with sinus graft: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trial.Journal of Indian Prosthodontic SocietyPooled it
- Two-Year Follow-Up of 4-mm-Long Implants Used as Distal Support of Full-Arch FDPs Compared to 10-mm Implants Installed after Sinus Floor Elevation. A Randomized Clinical Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Trial
- Comparative Analysis of Peri-Implant Bone Loss in Extra-Short, Short, and Conventional Implants. A 3-Year Retrospective Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Trial
- An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses on Transcrestal Sinus Floor Elevation: Methodological Quality, Primary-Study Overlap, and Interpretive Boundaries.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Schneiderian Membrane Elevation up to 8 mm by Transcrestal Technique Using Hollowed Osteotomes: A Human Cadaver Study.Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2025Article
- Preprosthetic Surgery-Narrative Review and Current Debate.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Maxillary sinus floor augmentation: a review of current evidence on anatomical factors and a decision tree.International journal of oral science · 2023Review
- Insertion Torque, Removal Torque, and Resonance Frequency Analysis Values of Ultrashort, Short, and Standard Dental Implants: An In Vitro Study on Polyurethane Foam Sheets.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2022Article
- Large Grafting Void Resembling a Surgical Ciliated Cyst following Maxillary Sinus Augmentation. Four Case Reports with Histological Observation.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Intraoperative complications and early implant failure after transcrestal sinus floor elevation with residual bone height ≤5 mm: A retrospective multicenter study.Clinical oral implants research · 2022Article
- Short Implants versus Longer Implants with Sinus Floor Elevation: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials with a Post-Loading Follow-Up Duration of 5 Years.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Clinical performance of short versus standard dental implants in vertically augmented bone: an overview of systematic reviews.Clinical oral investigations · 2021Review
- Short Dental Implants (≤8.5 mm) versus Standard Dental Implants (≥10 mm): A One-Year Post-Loading Prospective Observational Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Observational
- A Minimally Invasive Technique for Short Spiral Implant Insertion with Contextual Crestal Sinus Lifting in the Atrophic Maxilla: A Preliminary Report.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the use of short implants (≤6 mm) in atrophic posterior maxilla versus longer implants (≥10 mm) with sinus floor elevation.
designA systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomised controlled trials (RCTs). DATA SOURCES: Electronic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane CENTRAL. Retrospective and prospective hand searches were also performed. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: RCTs comparing short implants (≤6 mm) and longer implants (≥10 mm) with sinus floor elevation were included. Outcome measures included implant survival (primary outcome), marginal bone loss (MBL), complications and patient satisfaction. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Risks of bias in and across studies were evaluated. Meta-analysis, subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were undertaken. Quality of evidence was assessed according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.
resultsA total of seven RCTs involving 310 participants were included. No significant difference in survival rate was found for 1-3 years follow-up (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.04, p=0.74, I²=0%, moderate-quality evidence) or for 3 years or longer follow-up (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.04, p=0.79, I²=0%, moderate-quality evidence). However, short implants (≤6 mm) showed significantly less MBL in 1-3 years follow-up (MD=-0.13 mm, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.05; p=0.001, I²=87%, low-quality evidence) and in 3 years or longer follow-up (MD=-0.25 mm, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.10; p=0.001, I²=0%, moderate-quality evidence). In addition, short implant (≤6 mm) resulted in fewer postsurgery reaction (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.31, p<0.001, I²=40%, moderate-quality evidence) and sinus perforation or infection (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.63, p=0.01, I²=0%, moderate-quality evidence).
conclusionsFor atrophic posterior maxilla, short implants (≤6 mm) are a promising alternative to sinus floor elevation, with comparable survival rate, less MBL and postsurgery reactions. Additional high-quality studies are needed to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of short implants (≤6 mm). TRIAL REGISTERATION NUMBER: The protocol has been registered at PROSPERO (CRD42018103531).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.