aim of this study was to compare survival and success rates of 6
mm-long and 10 mm-long implants in partially edentulous posterior areas.
MATERIALS AND METHODS:
patients with a partially edentulous area were included in the study.
Patients were randomly allocated according to a parallel group design to
receive 6 mm or 10 mm-long implants. A total of 54 implants were placed
(26 × 6 mm implants). Patients were followed for 10 years after
prosthetic loading. Outcome measures were prosthesis and implant
survival, marginal bone level changes and complications.
10 years, 17 patients (eight with 6 mm implants and nine with 10 mm
implants) were available: three 6 mm and four 10 mm patients were lost
to follow-up. One 6 mm implant failed during the healing period and its
related prosthesis could not be placed. No implants were lost after
loading. Nine patients in the 6 mm group registered a total of 15
complications: two mucositis, six decementations and seven chippings.
Ten patients in the 10 mm group registered a total of 13 complications:
five mucositis, two decementations and six chippings. Overall the
difference for complications between the two groups was not
statistically signiﬁcant (P = 0.22; difference in proportion = -0.02;
95% CI: -0.31 to 0.27). Decementations in the 6 mm group were
statistically significant higher than the 10 mm group (P = 0.04;
difference in proportion = 0.39; 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.74). Marginal bone
loss at 10 years was 0.84 and 0.37 mm with the 6 mm and 10 mm groups,
respectively (difference between the two groups 0.49 mm; 95% CI -0.31;
1.29; not statistically signiﬁcant: t test P = 0.22).
supported by 6 mm or 10 mm-long implants showed similar clinical
outcomes in terms of survival and success rates, although 6 mm implants
had more decementations.