Library
PubMed Central Open Access
research article
Professional
Open access

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Survival Rates Between Short and Standard Dental Implants in the Posterior Jaw: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Source: PubMed Central Open Access, NCBI / U.S. National Library of Medicine

CureusLast synced 8/10/2026Status: syncedPMID: 42571603 pmidDOI: 10.7759/cureus.112307

Introduction: Short dental implants have been proposed as a minimally invasive alternative to standard implants for rehabilitation of posterior edentulous regions with limited bone availability. However, concerns remain regarding their long-term survival and risk of failure compared to standard-length implants. This study aimed to compare the survival and failure rates of short (<10 mm) and standard (≥10 mm) dental implants placed in the posterior maxilla and mandible. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 207 patients who received 363 dental implants in the posterior jaw. The implants were categorized as short implants (<10 mm; n = 141) and standard implants (≥10 mm; n = 222). Demographic characteristics, implant-related variables, and clinical outcomes were retrieved from the patient records. Implant failure, survival rates, and the influence of jaw location on implant outcomes were assessed. Statistical analyses included chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, independent-samples t-tests, and odds ratio calculations. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results: The mean age of the study population was 52.1 ± 10.5 years, with 142 (68.6%) males and 65 (31.4%) females. Overall, implant failure was significantly higher among short implants than among standard implants (p < 0.001). Standard implants demonstrated significantly lower odds of failure than short implants (OR = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.15-0.57). In the maxilla, the failure rates were 18 (2

Abstract

Introduction: Short dental implants have been proposed as a minimally invasive alternative to standard implants for rehabilitation of posterior edentulous regions with limited bone availability. However, concerns remain regarding their long-term survival and risk of failure compared to standard-length implants. This study aimed to compare the survival and failure rates of short (<10 mm) and standard (≥10 mm) dental implants placed in the posterior maxilla and mandible. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 207 patients who received 363 dental implants in the posterior jaw. The implants were categorized as short implants (<10 mm; n = 141) and standard implants (≥10 mm; n = 222). Demographic characteristics, implant-related variables, and clinical outcomes were retrieved from the patient records. Implant failure, survival rates, and the influence of jaw location on implant outcomes were assessed. Statistical analyses included chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, independent-samples t-tests, and odds ratio calculations. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results: The mean age of the study population was 52.1 ± 10.5 years, with 142 (68.6%) males and 65 (31.4%) females. Overall, implant failure was significantly higher among short implants than among standard implants (p < 0.001). Standard implants demonstrated significantly lower odds of failure than short implants (OR = 0.29; 95% CI: 0.15-0.57). In the maxilla, the failure rates were 18 (28.6%) for short implants and 8 (8.5%) for standard implants (p = 0.002), whereas in the mandible, the corresponding rates were 10 (12.8%) and 7 (5.5%), respectively (p = 0.110). The cumulative survival rates were lower for short implants as compared to standard implants. Conclusion: Standard dental implants demonstrated significantly higher survival rates and lower failure rates than short implants in posterior jaw rehabilitation. Although short implants remain a useful treatment option in anatomically restricted sites, careful case selection is necessary, particularly in the posterior maxilla, where the risk of failure appears to be greater.

Educational only
This information is for general education and is not medical advice. Always talk to a licensed U.S. clinician about your situation, medications, or treatment decisions.