Straumann funds a lot of research for their implants. So it's no surprise that they will have a lot to show for their new titanium-zirconium alloy, known as roxolid in the vernacular. The idea behind this Ti-Zr alloy is that it is stronger, allowing a smaller diameter implant to be created with a chance for fracture. This is great for areas such as the maxillary lateral or mandibular incisor, but can it be used to replace a larger size tooth that just has limited horizontal bone? This randomized controlled study aims to find any differences between a standard 4.1mm titanium implant and the 3.3mm Ti-Zr implant.
Method and Materials: 40 implants were randomized into two groups of 20 for implant placement into anterior or premolar sites. A two stage approach was used (erring on the side of caution, don't want to have a failure for company). Temp placed at 3 months and final restoration at 6 months post implant placement. Patients were followed up for one year.
The surgical and prosthetic procedure.
Results: Surprise, surprise, no statistically significant difference between the groups at all. No difference in bone level, success, bone grafting, etc. Wouldn't expect an implant company to want you to stop buying one of their implants to start buying another one. But realistically, there is no statistically significant difference because they are both good implants and they work.
Some interesting results, though not significant, was the surgery time was shorter in the smaller implants (less drills), and surgeons preferred these implants more than the conventional size. This is surprising because both size implants required the same amount of bone grafting at implant placement. I have a feeling the smaller size has more bone around it when placed even when bone grafting is necessary, thus giving the surgeon some peace of mind.
Bone level changes by implant.
My thoughts: Many implant companies have a really small implant. If you look at the connection of these implants you will invariably see a really small band of titanium holding the implant together, and that should scare you. This study had only one year of follow up. In a prosthetic complication timeline, one year is nothing. If this Ti-Zr alloy can really prevent prosthetic complications in a small implant than it really is an intriguing product.
Another advantage to smaller implants is: esthetics. As long as they are placed in a way to allow for good esthetic emergence, they allow for greater bone and papilla thickness on either side of the implant, thus allowing fuller and more esthetic papillas.
If this implant can stand the test of time, it may be the best little implant on the market.
Benic G, Galucci G, Mokti M, Hammerle C, Weber HP, and Jung R: Titanium-zirconium narrow diameter versus titanium regular diameter implants for anterior and premolar single crowns: 1-year results of a randomized controlled clinical study. J Clin Periodontol 2013; dii: 10.1111/jcpe.12156
Fetner and Hartigan periodontics and implants has been serving the Jacksonville community for over 25 years. The practice is family owned and operated, and is always on the cutting edge of dental technology.