Background: This narrative review provides an evidence-based overview of the comparison between mini-dental implants (MDI) and conventional dental implants for definitive prosthesis retention. In addition, recommendations are made on whether the use of reduced diameter dental implants is more appropriate. Method: A literature review was conducted via electronic search addressing the following topics: (1) osseointegration, (2) peri-implant soft tissue characteristics, (3) biomechanics, (4) implant survival and (5) implant success. Conclusion: The procedure for dental implant prosthetic rehabilitation should preferentially include conventional dental implants (i.e. [Formula: see text][Formula: see text]mm fixture diameter). Small (3-3.25[Formula: see text]mm) and narrow (3.3-3.5[Formula: see text]mm) dental implants should primarily be used in non-load-bearing regions. MDI ([Formula: see text][Formula: see text]mm) should be considered to retain definitive prosthesis, only for reasons of anatomy or patient-centred preferences and as a last resort. If MDI are to be used, patients should be made aware of the lack of long-term, high-quality evidence as a part of the informed consent process and that most of the prospective data available pertain to MDI retaining complete dentures.
No clinical trial protocols linked to this paper
Clinical trials are automatically linked when NCT numbers are found in the paper's title or abstract.PICO Elements
No PICO elements extracted yet. Click "Extract PICO" to analyze this paper.
Paper Details
MeSH Terms
Associated Data
No associated datasets or code repositories found for this paper.
Related Papers
Related paper suggestions will be available in future updates.