State of the art in oral implants

Abstract

Uncontrolled oral implant devices are still being widely used. The documentation of most oral implant systems is poorly backed up or not followed up for an adequate time period. Success rates are being quoted without reference to any defined success criteria. Frequently used oral implant designs such as the Core-Vent, IMZ and Calcitek hydroxyapatite coated implants are in neither case supported by any adequate clinical reports from minimally 5-years of follow-up. Other implant systems such as the ITI, some subperiosteal designs and the Tübingen implant demonstrate well-controlled and acceptable 5-year data but are not followed up in a sufficient number or have demonstrated less good results in the 10-year evaluation. The Small transosteal staple has been adequately reported for more than 10 years of follow-up, whereas the Brånemark implant is the only endosseous design that has demonstrated acceptable 15-year success rates.