# Short versus standard-length implants: A systematic review on clinical outcomes and success rates

## TL;DR

Short dental implants can be as successful as standard-length ones when used appropriately, avoiding the need for bone augmentation in certain cases.

## Contribution

This systematic review provides evidence that short implants are a viable alternative to standard-length implants under specific clinical conditions.

## Key findings

- Short implants show comparable success and survival rates to standard-length implants in atrophic ridges.
- Appropriate patient selection and clinical protocols are crucial for successful outcomes with short implants.
- Short implants offer a minimally invasive option, avoiding bone augmentation procedures.

## Abstract

Dental implants have become a reliable solution for edentulism, yet bone limitations often necessitate alternative approaches such as
short implants. This systematic review evaluates and compares the clinical outcomes and success rates of short dental implants (≤8 mm)
versus standard-length implants (>8 mm) in various clinical scenarios. Data from multiple studies were analyzed to assess implant
survival, marginal bone loss, prosthetic complications and long-term stability. The findings suggest that, when appropriately indicated,
short implants demonstrate comparable success and survival rates to their longer counterparts, particularly in atrophic ridges where
bone augmentation may be avoided. However, variations in surgical techniques, prosthetic protocols and patient-related factors can
influence outcomes. Thus, short implants represent a viable, minimally invasive alternative, provided patient selection and clinical
protocols are well-considered.