SynthesisClinical oral investigations2022
Short versus standard implants at sinus augmented sites: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ten-year outcomes of short dental implants (≤ 6 mm): a systematic review and sensitivity meta-analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy of Different Materials for Maxillary Sinus Floor Augmentation With Lateral Approach. A Systematic Review.Clinical implant dentistry and related research · 2025Pooled it
- 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
- An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses on Transcrestal Sinus Floor Elevation: Methodological Quality, Primary-Study Overlap, and Interpretive Boundaries.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Article
- The Influence of Insertion Torque on Stress Distribution in Peri-Implant Bones Around Ultra-Short Implants: An FEA Study.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- A Finite Element Analysis of a New Dental Implant Design: The Influence of the Diameter, Length, and Material of an Implant on Its Biomechanical Behavior.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Relationship Between Implant Connection and Implant Fracture: Systematic Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Short versus standard-length implants: A systematic review on clinical outcomes and success rates.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Preprosthetic Surgery-Narrative Review and Current Debate.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- 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.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
- Sinus Mucosal Damage Triggered by Synthetic or Xenogeneic Bone Substitutes: A Histological Analysis in Rabbits.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2022Article
- Cone-beam computed tomography assessment of palatal-nasal recess of maxillary sinus in dentulous and edentulous subjects.Journal of Indian Society of PeriodontologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundShort implants are proposed as a less invasive alternative with fewer complications than standard implants in combination with sinus lift. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to state the efficacy of placing short implants (≤ 6 mm) compared to standard-length implants (≥ 8 mm) performing sinus lift techniques in patients with edentulous posterior atrophic jaws. Efficacy will be evaluated through analyzing implant survival (IS) and maintenance of peri-implant bone (MBL).
methodsScreening process was done using the National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE by PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Oral Health, and Web of Science (WOS). The articles included were randomized controlled trials. Risk of bias was evaluated according to The Cochrane Collaboration's tool. Weighted means were calculated. Heterogeneity was determined using Higgins (I
resultsFourteen studies (597 patients and 901 implants) were evaluated. IS was 1.02 risk ratio, ranging from 1.00 to 1.05 (CI 95%) (p = 0.09), suggesting that IS was similar when both techniques were used. MBL was higher in patients with standard-length implants plus sinus lift elevation (p = 0.03). MBL was 0.11 (0.01-0.20) mm (p = 0.03) and 0.23 (0.07-0.39) mm (p = 0.005) before and after 1 year of follow-up, respectively, indicating that the marginal bone loss is greater for standard-length implants. DISCUSSION: Within the limitations of the present study, as relatively small sample size, short dental implants can be used as an alternative to standard-length implants plus sinus elevation in cases of atrophic posterior maxilla. Higher MBL was observed in the groups where standard-length implants were used, but implant survival was similar in both groups. Moreover, with short implants, it was observed a reduced postoperative discomfort, minimal invasiveness, shorter treatment time, and reduced costs. CLINICAL CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The low MBL promoted by short implants does contribute to a paradigm shift from sinus grafting with long implants to short implants. Further high-quality long-term studies are required to confirm these findings.
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.