1 – The ‘mini’-implant has arrived
J Am Dent Assoc. 2006 Mar;137(3):387-90.
Abstract: There is no question that dental implants have been the most influential change in dentistry during the last half-century. In general, they are well-proven and highly useful. However, the diameter of standard implants (approximately 3.75 mm), along with the frequent need to graft bone to allow for their placement, have limited their use for those who most need implants.
The introduction, approval and continuing observation of success of smaller-diameter mini-implants have stimulated use of implants in situations in which standard-sized implants could not have been used without grafting. The result has been more patients who have been served successfully at reduced cost with minimized pain and trauma–patients who could not have been treated with implants otherwise. Continuing research is needed for further verification of the acceptability of mini-implants.
2 – Mini dental implants for long-term fixed and removable prosthetics: a retrospective analysis of 2514 implants placed over a five-year period.
Shatkin TE, Shatkin S, Oppenheimer BD,
Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2007 Feb;28(2):92-9; quiz 100-1.
Abstract: Over the past decade, endosseous implants of increasingly smaller diameters have been introduced into the field of dentistry. Small diameter implants (SDIs) are generally 2.75 mm to 3.3 mm in diameter. They are frequently used in cases of limited alveolar anatomy Mini dental implants (MDIs) are smaller than their SDI counterparts, with diameters ranging from 1.8 mm to 2.4 mm.
They are suitable for long-term use-a task for which the device was approved by the Food and Drug Administration. The following study describes the authors’ experience with MDIs under this indication. Over a 5-year period, 2514 MDIs were placed in 531 patients. The mean duration of follow-up was 2.9 years.
The implants supported fixed (1278) and removable prostheses (1236), with nearly equal placement in the mandible and maxilla (1256 and 1258, respectively). The overall implant survival was 94.2%. Based on a Cox proportional hazards model, statistically significant predictors of failure include use in removable prostheses (hazard ratio = 4.28), the posterior maxilla (3.37), atrophic bone (3.32), and cigarette smokers (2.28).
Implant failures (145) were attributed to mobility with or without suppuration (19% vs 81%, respectively). The mean failure time for these implants was approximately 6.4 months (193+/-42 days). This temporally correlates with the osseointegration period. A learning curve was established for this procedure, and implant survival improved with placement experience.
Based on these results, the authors have devised treatment guidelines for the use of MDIs in long-term fixed and removable prostheses. MDIs are not a panacea; however, proper training enables the general dentist to successfully implement MDIs into clinical practice.
3 – Mini Dental Implants: A Retrospective Analysis of 5640 Implants Placed Over a 12-Year Period
Todd E. Shatkin, Chritopher A. Petrotto
Compendium of continuing education in dentistry (Jamesburg, N.J.: 1995) 10/2012; 33 Spec 3:2-9.
Abstract: Mini dental implants are becoming increasingly popular in dental care today. Because of their smaller size they are often used in cases of limited bone anatomy. Mini dental implants have diameters ranging from 1.8 mm to 3 mm and are suitable for long-term use. This article describes a retrospective analysis of 5640 mini dental implants placed into 1260 patients over a 12-year period. The mean length of follow-up was 3.5 years.
The implants placed supported removable (2319) and fixed prostheses (3321), with placement in the maxilla (3134) and mandible (2506). The overall implant survival was 92.1%. Failures of implants (445) were attributed to mobility of the implant; the mean time to failure for these implants was 14.4 months.
The small size of these implants has led to the development of techniques that enable placement and use in a short amount of time for both the doctor and patient. The high rates of success show that mini dental implants are suitable for use in supporting fixed and removable prosthetics.
4 – Surface Treatment of Small Diameter Implants and the Effect on Osseointegration and Crestal Bone Retention
Bruno Lemay, DMD, Robert J. Miller, MA, DDS
TEAMWORK Vol.5-No.1 – January 2012, 44-50.
Abstract: Since the introduction of dental implants, clinicians have developed strategies to accelerate healing and compress the time to final prosthetic reconstruction. These strategies have included modifying implant macroarchitecture, microarchitecture, and surface chemistry.
While the first surface treatment utilized acid etching to increase surface area, the earliest attempt to incorporate a bone-like surface treatment employed a plasma sprayed hydroxyapatite appositional coating to improve the quality of osseointegration. Although long term results on HA coated implants have been inconclusive, additional studies using calcium phosphate materials have been conducted with more definitive outcomes.
5 – Narrow-implant–retained overdenture in an atrophic mandibular ridge: a case report with 6-year follow-up
Carlos Roberto Garcia Araujo, DDS, Paulo Antonio Martins-Junior, DDS, MSc, PhD, Roberto Carlos de Araujo, DDS, MSc, Marcos Augusto de Sa, MSc, PhD, Thomaz Wassall, DDS, PhD, Anderson Jose Ferreira, DDS, MSc, PhD
General Dentistry November/December 2015 e 12-15
Abstract: When atrophic jaws compromise oral rehabilitation with conventional implants, narrow-diameter implants can be used. This case report describes treatment of an edentulous 75-year-old diabetic woman with a severely resorbed mandibular ridge. Her mandibular dentition was restored with an overdenture supported by 3 narrow implants and 1 mini implant. Her maxillary dentition was restored with a conventional complete denture.
A 6-year clinical and radiographic follow-up confirmed that the narrow implants had provided effective stability for the overdenture, providing improvements in phonetics and masticatory ability at a low cost.
Keywords: edentulous, narrow implant, overdenture