SynthesisBMC oral health2026
Ten-year outcomes of short dental implants (≤ 6 mm): a systematic review and sensitivity meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to explore the ten-year survival rates (SR), complication rates, and marginal bone loss (MBL) of short dental implants (≤ 6 mm). MATERIALS AND
methodsLiterature searches were conducted in four databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective studies reporting clinical outcomes of short dental implants with ten years of follow-up were included. Both single-group meta-analyses and paired-comparison meta-analyses were conducted utilizing the statistical software R version 4.3.1. An interpolation model was employed to handle missing data for the sensitivity meta-analysis of SR. The number of PROSPERO was CRD42024522613.
resultsA total of 8 studies (4 RCTs and 4 prospective) were included. The single-group meta-analyses encompassed 8 studies. The pooled estimate of 10-year SR was 91.2% (95% CI: 0.843-0.965) at the patient level (PL) and 93.7% (95% CI: 0.878-0.980) at the implant level (IL). Sensitivity meta-analysis estimates were 89.7% (PL) and 92.8% (IL). Subgroup analyses revealed that screw retention implants had lower SR than cemented retention. The incidence of technical complications was 23.5%, while biological complications included peri-implant mucositis (33.6%) and peri-implantitis (0.4%). The pooled MBL estimates over ten years were 0.277 mm for both the PL and IL. Paired-comparison meta-analyses of four RCTs showed that short implants had a significantly lower 10-year SR than long implants (RR, 0.920 (95% CI: 0.857-0.987) at the PL and RR, 0.943 (95% CI: 0.896-0.992) at the IL), but no significant differences were observed in technical, biological complications, or MBL.
conclusionFor patients with jawbone atrophy, short implants may represent a viable long-term treatment option, although their 10-year survival rate is slightly lower than that of standard implants. However, given the limitations of this study, the above conclusions and their clinical implications should be interpreted with caution.
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.