SynthesisInternational journal of implant dentistry2022
Simultaneous placement of short implants (≤ 8 mm) versus standard length implants (≥ 10 mm) after sinus floor elevation in atrophic posterior maxillae: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of implant dentistry, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 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
- Assessment of guided lateral maxillary sinus lift procedure with simultaneous implant placement using stereolithographic surgical guide: a randomized controlled clinical study.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2025Trial
- Antral membrane balloon technique versus Densah bur in crestal sinus lift with simultaneous implant placement: a randomized clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2024Trial
- Influence of different surgical techniques on primary implant stability in the posterior maxilla: a randomized controlled clinical trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2023Trial
- Z-classification: an anatomy-based ridge-sinus-zygoma classification and decision funnel for zygomatic implantology.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Review
- An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses on Transcrestal Sinus Floor Elevation: Methodological Quality, Primary-Study Overlap, and Interpretive Boundaries.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Analysis of prosthetic outcomes and influencing factors in patients with alveolar bone atrophy.Acta odontologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Clinical success of single crowns supported by short implants-a systematic review and meta-analysis.Odontology · 2026Review
- PRF-Assisted Crestal Sinus Floor Elevation With Bone Tap Drills in the Implant Surgical Kit (A Simplified Minimally Invasive Technique): A Case Series.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
- Short versus standard-length implants: A systematic review on clinical outcomes and success rates.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- CGF with Bio-Oss collagen as grafting materials for simultaneous implant placement after osteotome sinus floor elevation: a prospective study.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Preprosthetic Surgery-Narrative Review and Current Debate.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes of using short implants (≤ 8 mm) inserted with osteotome sinus floor elevation (OSFE) and standard implants (≥ 10 mm) inserted with sinus floor elevation (SFE) in atrophic posterior maxillae with insufficient residual bone height (RBH).
methodsAn electronic search was performed on PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from 1994 to July 2022, in combination with a manual search of references in relevant articles. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the clinical results between short and standard implant placement with SFE were included. The primary outcomes were implant survival rate and marginal bone loss (MBL); the secondary outcome was complication rate.
resultsThree RCTs were included, totaling 138 short and 156 standard implants. The results of the meta-analysis showed no significant differences between the short and standard implant groups in survival rate (RR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.96-1.08, p = 0.570), MBL (MD = - 0.13, 95% CI - 0.32 to 0.07, p = 0.190) and complication rate (intra-surgical complication: RR = 1.14, 95% CI 0.46-2.83, p = 0.770; post-operative complication: RR = 1.34, 95% CI 0.71-2.55, p = 0.370).
conclusionsUsing short implants (≤ 8 mm) combined with OSFE might be an alternative to standard implants (≥ 10 mm) with SFE when the RBH of the posterior maxilla is insufficient. Based on a short-term clinical observation, short implants with OSFE show good results in terms of survival rate, MBL, and complication incidence.
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.