Short-term comparison of clinical application effects of Astra OsseoSpeed EV short implants and conventional implants for maxillary sinus elevation

1. If the survival rate, marginal bone resorption , complications and patient satisfaction of the short implant group are comparable or better than those of the conventional implant group, then short implants can be regarded as an effective treatment option for insufficient alveolar bone in the posterior teeth area. Thus, in clinical practice, the investigators can utilize short implants combined with transcrestal sinus floor elevation, or even implant short implants to help patients with certain insufficient maxillary bone complete implant restoration without resorting to more complex, costly and more invasive external elevation surgery to increase the length of posterior teeth implants in the maxillary region.
2. If it is found that the short implant group has a higher incidence of complications or a lower long-term survival rate, further exploration of its indications and optimization of surgical strategies is required.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Patients aged over 18 years old with at least one area of the posterior dental arch having insufficient alveolar bone height (3-6 mm)
• Patients are in good health and have no major systemic diseases such as diabetes or cardiovascular diseases, and no maxillary sinus lesions
• They are willing to undergo implant restoration treatment and can complete at least 3-year follow-up.

Exclusion Criteria:

• horizontal bone deficiency alveolar ridges,bone defects caused by tumor resection
• excessive tobacco use (more than 10 cigarettes per day)
• severe liver and kidney diseases
• history of radiotherapy and chemotherapy in the head and neck region
• uncontrolled diabetes
• active periodontal disease
• oral mucosal diseases in the treatment area or poor oral hygiene,
• PI > 70%

Methods and Results