SynthesisBMC oral health2024
A network meta-analysis comparing treatment modalities of short and long implants in the posterior maxilla with insufficient bone height.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Ten-year outcomes of short dental implants (≤ 6 mm): a systematic review and sensitivity meta-analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Pooled it
- Clinical performance of short implants vs. standard implants in edentulous patients. An umbrella review.Frontiers in oral health · 2025Pooled it
- Management and clinical analysis of complications following all-on-4 implant-supported rehabilitation in a patient with severe maxillary bone deficiency and periodontitis: a case report.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Three-Unit Prosthesis Supported by a Single Implant With Two Cantilever Extensions in the Posterior Region (T-Bridge): Case Report With a 2-Year Follow-Up.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Long-term functional outcome of short implants in the posterior region with a follow-up of 7 years: A case report.SAGE open medical case reports · 2026Article
- Implant success in grafted vs non-grafted posterior mandibular sites: A clinical study.Bioinformation · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveBased on the critical role of implant length and placement timing in treatment success, this study aimed to compare clinical outcomes (implant failure, marginal bone loss, biological and mechanical complications) between short implants (4-8 mm) versus long implants (≥ 8 mm) with sinus floor elevation, and between delayed versus immediate placement of long implants in the posterior maxilla.
methodsThis network meta-analysis was prospectively registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023495027). Adhering to PRISMA-NMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed eligible studies from January 2014 to November 2024 was conducted across major databases, such as the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science. The main focus of this NMA was to determine the rate of implant failure, as well as to assess marginal bone loss and the occurrence of biological and mechanical complications related to the implants.
resultsData from 17 studies, involving 1,076 patients and 1,751 implants, was collected and examined. Long implants have lower failure rates (OR = 1.26; 95% CI = 0.53, 3.00) and short dental implants showed a trend towards lower biological (OR = 0.47; 95% CI = 0.19, 1.18) and mechanical (OR = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.45, 1.94) complications rates, although this trend was not statistically significant. Additionally, compared to longer implants, short implants resulted in a significant reduction in marginal bone loss, regardless of whether long implants were immediately (MD=-0.17; 95%CI: -0.29, -0.05) or delayed (MD = 0.35; 95%CI: 0.05, 0.64) placed following sinus floor elevation. The analysis of cumulative ranking probabilities revealed that delayed placement of long implants with SFE demonstrated the highest efficacy in reducing implant failure (73.9%). SIs were found to excel in reducing marginal bone loss (88.7%) and biological complications (88.2%%), while short implants with SFE proved to be the most effective in preventing mechanical complications (66.0%%).
conclusionShort implants achieved comparable clinical outcomes to long implants with sinus floor elevation in posterior maxilla with limited vertical bone height. Given the limitations of the network meta-analysis and included studies, treatment selection should be individualized based on specific patient conditions.
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.