Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Clinical Report| Volume 126, ISSUE 2, P137-143, August 2021

Mandibular implant-supported fixed complete dental prostheses on implants with ultrashort and standard length: A pilot treatment


      Edentulous patients may be restored with complete-arch implant-supported fixed complete dental prostheses (IFCDPs) on angled distal implants or on parallel implants distributed equally across the mandible to increase the area of support. A treatment is presented to introduce the clinical concept of providing edentulous patients with an implant-supported fixed complete dental prosthesison parallel tissue-level implants in the mandible with standard length implants interforaminally and ultrashort implants distally. A structured prosthetic approach was used for the tooth arrangement with a modified workflow as per the Biofunctional Prosthetic System adapted for static computer-aided implant surgery (s-CAIS) and computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) of the screw-retained implant-supported fixed complete dental prosthesis. The concept offered advantages in challenging anatomic, surgical, and prosthetic conditions; providing distal nonangled abutments and implant platforms, which were straightforward to clean. If necessary, the prosthesis could have been easily converted into a removable overdenture using the existing digital prosthetic arrangement. Should implant removal be required, the extrashort implants can be removed with minimal surgical risk or morbidity.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Felton D.A.
        Edentulism and comorbid factors.
        J Prosthodont. 2009; 18: 88-96
        • Ducommun J.
        • El Kholy K.
        • Rahman L.
        • Schimmel M.
        • Chappuis V.
        • Buser D.
        Analysis of trends in implant therapy at a surgical specialty clinic: patient pool, indications, surgical procedures, and rate of early failures-a 15-year retrospective analysis.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019; 30: 1097-1106
        • Slade G.D.
        • Akinkugbe A.A.
        • Sanders A.E.
        Projections of U.S. edentulism prevalence following 5 decades of decline.
        J Dent Res. 2014; 93: 959-965
        • Adell R.
        • Lekholm U.
        • Rockler B.
        • Branemark P.I.
        A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw.
        Int J Oral Surg. 1981; 10: 387-416
        • Branemark P.I.
        • Hansson B.O.
        • Adell R.
        • Breine U.
        • Lindstrom J.
        • Hallen O.
        • et al.
        Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period.
        Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl. 1977; 16: 1-132
        • Lundgren D.
        • Falk H.
        • Laurell L.
        Influence of number and distribution of occlusal cantilever contacts on closing and chewing forces in dentitions with implant-supported fixed prostheses occluding with complete dentures.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1989; 4: 277-283
        • Maló P.
        • de Araújo Nobre M.
        • Lopes A.
        • Ferro A.
        • Botto J.
        The all-on-4 treatment concept for the rehabilitation of the completely edentulous mandible: a longitudinal study with 10 to 18 years of follow-up.
        Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019; 21: 565-577
        • Calvo-Guirado J.L.
        • Lopez Torres J.A.
        • Dard M.
        • Javed F.
        • Perez-Albacete Martinez C.
        • Mate Sanchez de Val J.E.
        Evaluation of extrashort 4-mm implants in mandibular edentulous patients with reduced bone height in comparison with standard implants: a 12-month results.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016; 27: 867-874
        • Falisi G.
        • Bernardi S.
        • Rastelli C.
        • Pietropaoli D.
        • F D.E.A.
        • Frascaria M.
        • et al.
        “All on short” prosthetic-implant supported rehabilitations.
        Oral Implantol (Rome). 2017; 10: 477-487
        • Tabrizi R.
        • Arabion H.
        • Aliabadi E.
        • Hasanzadeh F.
        Does increasing the number of short implants reduce marginal bone loss in the posterior mandible? A prospective study.
        Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016; 54: 731-735
        • Matsuda Y.
        • Yanagida H.
        • Ide T.
        • Matsumura H.
        • Tanoue N.
        Bond strength of poly(methyl methacrylate) denture base material to cast titanium and cobalt-chromium alloy.
        J Adhes Dent. 2010; 12: 223-229
        • Derks J.
        • Schaller D.
        • Hakansson J.
        • Wennstrom J.L.
        • Tomasi C.
        • Berglundh T.
        Effectiveness of implant therapy analyzed in a Swedish population: prevalence of peri-implantitis.
        J Dent Res. 2016; 95: 43-49
        • Müller F.
        • Schimmel M.
        Revised success criteria: a vision to meet frailty and dependency in implant patients.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016; 31: 15
        • Schimmel M.
        • Müller F.
        • Suter V.
        • Buser D.
        Implants for elderly patients.
        Periodontol 2000. 2017; 73: 228-240