# Complete Full Arch Supported by Short Implant (<8 mm) in Edetulous Jaw: A Systematic Review
## 4 Discussion  
This review considered whether full prosthetic arches supported by short (\(\leq\)8 mm) implants confer success in the aesthetic/functional restoration of completely edentulous mandibles. The concept of short implants has been described and evaluated in recent years, but it has not yet been adequately defined with regard to the length and diameter that are sufficient to have surgical and prosthetic predictability. In this review, implants with an \"osseointegrable surface length\" of less than or equal to 8 mm were chosen to guide the search for articles in the literature [27]. An average marginal bone loss of about 0.13 mm was found to correlate with a randomized trial that studied 75 short implants and reported average values between 0 and 2 mm for the same follow-up period of 3-5 years, as described by [PERSON] et al. [23]. In contrast, a systematic review by [PERSON] and [PERSON] et al. [7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 27; 28; 29] found a significant effect of an increased diameter on the marginal bone loss of short implants supporting single crowns. The bone loss of short implants in the first year is significantly better than that of long implants. It can be argued that the type of prosthetic rehabilitation provided on a short implant plays a critical role on the outcome of bone loss. [PERSON] et al. [30] in a review showed that the disadvantageous ratio of implant length to superstructure height does not result in bone loss for both short and long implants. Of interest is the study by [PERSON] et al. [31], who, in a review, reported high survival rates for implants supporting fixed full-arch restorations in the mandible. Immediate loading procedures have high survival rates for both fixed and removable restorations. However, there are differences in the number of implants, implant characteristics, complications, and costs between these two types of prostheses. [PERSON] et al. [32] in a review showed that survival rates of short implants until full-arch support are high regardless of the length or position of the inserted implant. More biological complications were found in standard implants, especially for splinted prostheses, which were associated with fewer technical complications. The results of this review demonstrated that, when used correctly, short implants achieve predictable long-term results, provided that they are placed following a comprehensive surgical and prosthetic protocol based on the various biomechanics parameters essential for optimizing long-term prognosis. The survival rate of the implants placed in this study (97.7%) parallels the systematic review performed by [PERSON] et al. [33], who observed high survival rates (98.6%) for short implants with a rough surface (6 mm) placed in the mandible under various prosthetic restorations. [PERSON] et al. [8] in a study showed that out of 14 patients with a complete mandibular arch, only five implants failed, with an overall implant survival rate of 96.9%. No definitive prostheses failed, with a prosthetic success rate of 100%. The failed implants  
Figure 3: Explanatory diagram of the mean of outcomes in the three selected articles. were successfully replaced without definitive problems before the final prostheses were made, with an overall treatment success rate of 100%. In addition, it was observed that about 75% of failures of short implants were early failures. The survival rate of short implants in this study is comparable to the survival rate (96%) of longer implants placed in heterologous bone by various surgical techniques. Another important study by [PERSON] et al. [34] showed that the 12 month survival rate of 100 short implants (4 mm) was 95.7 percent, and 92.3 percent at 24 months, which is slightly lower than another study by [PERSON] et al. [28], who reported a survival rate of short implants placed in the mandible and loading of 94.6 percent at two years.