Abstract
For the most part, the indications and contraindications for short and ultrashort implants are not significantly different than those for traditional length implants. A review of the literature shows considerable indications for implant usage—both traditional lengths, short and ultrashort implants. It is well documented that the initial indication for osseointegrated traditional length implants was to assist in mandibular denture retention [1, 2]. It was not long before the indications expanded and at the present time there is a plethora of clinical uses for both traditional and short osseointegrated implants. Among these indications are the following:
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Branemark PI, Hansson B, Adell R, et al. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10 year period. Alqvist & Wiksell International: Stockholm; 1977.
Proceedings of the Toronto Conference on Osseointegration in Clinical Dentistry. J Prosthetic Dent, vol 49, 6 June 1983 and vol. 50, 1, 2 and 3 July, August and September 1983.
Ewers R. Maxilla sinus grafting with marine algae derived bone forming material: a clinical report of long term results. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005;63(12):1712–23.
Friberg B, Jemt T, Lekholm U. Early failures in 4641 consecutively placed Branemark implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1991;6:142–6.
European consensus conference on short, angulated and diameter reduced implants. Cologne Germany 2017.
Marincola R, Ewers R, et al. Sinus elevations with short implants. Implants. 2017;2:20–4.
Makani N, et al. Osseointegrated implants in growing children: a literature review. J Oral Implantol. 2014;40(5):627–31.
Ewers R, Seeman R. Personal communication 2017.
Kendrick S, Wong D. Vertical and horizontal dimensions of implant dentistry: numbers every dentist should know inside dentistry 2009; July–August 2–5.
Friedrich R, Laumann F, Zrnc T, Assaf A. The nasopalatine canal in adults on cone beam computed tomograms—a clinical study and review of the literature. In Vivo. 2015;29(4):467–86.
Allard R, de Vries K, van der Kwast W. Persisting bilateral nasopalatine ducts: a developmental anomaly. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1982;53:24–6.
De Mello JS, et al. Success rate and complications associated with dental implants in the incisive canal region: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017;46(12):1584–91.
Ewers R, Seeman R. Trinia Trio—“all-on-three”. Zahn Krone. 2017;3:11–7.
Lombardo G, et al. Cumulative success rate of short and ultrashort implants supporting single crowns in the posterior maxilla: a 3 year retrospective study. Int J Dent. 2017;2017:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/8434281.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Tomasetti, B.J., Ewers, R. (2020). Short Implants: Indications and Contraindications. In: Tomasetti, B., Ewers, R. (eds) Short Implants. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44199-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44199-9_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-44198-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-44199-9
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)