Bone Resorption Data on Astra Implants

“Follow-up research among patients consistently shows a marginal bone level reduction of just 0.4 mm or less for Astra Tech dental implants, a performance indicator at least three times superior to the industry norm. The findings involve hundreds of individual cases and are remarkable in their consistency,” says Lyndon Cooper, Professor of Dentistry in the Department of Prosthodontics at the University of North Carolina, who has performed one of the studies.

Professor Cooper is attending the second Astra Tech Dental World Congress in Washington, DC, held from June 4 to 7, where additional follow-up studies with long-term data are presented. Thousands of Astra Tech implants have been evaluated radiographically over a five-year period. Marginal bone levels were found to recede by less than 0.4 mm on average after one year, and was stable over the following years.

The current industry standard (1), based on research on other implant systems, shows a mean bone level reduction of about 1.5 mm after five years. Maintenance of the marginal bone level is a prerequisite for long-term esthetics and the successful function of the implant.

The limited marginal bone resorption being documented on Astra Tech implants indicates that it is time to reconsider our old ‘standard’ from 1986. The new standard should perhaps only allow 50% or less of the bone resorption currently accepted as a successful result,” says Tomas Albrektsson, Professor of Biomaterial Research at The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Sweden.

Dental implants from Astra Tech are among the most well documented on the market. The Astra Tech Implant System was introduced in the late 1980s and now, almost twenty years later, the same implant system remains highly effective.

Thousands of delegates from 23 countries attend the Astra Tech World Congress at the Gaylord National Resort & Conference Center in Washington, DC, where more than 130 of the world’s most respected dental researchers present their latest findings in the field of implant dentistry.

In 2007, Astra Tech acquired the US company Atlantis Components, Inc. The acquisition gave Astra Tech access to the latest CAD/CAM technology for individually fabricated abutments based on each patient’s individual needs.

1 Albrektsson T and Zarb, G. A. Int J Prosthodont 1993;6(2):95-105.

Contact:
Astra Tech Inc.
Janie Shen, 781 890 6800/6605
Director Corporate Communications
Visit Astra Tech at www.astratechdental.com

7 thoughts on “Bone Resorption Data on Astra Implants

  1. It would be nice to see the actual clinical paper on this, and not a glorified press release.

  2. Well one thing I do like about Astra is the amount of evidence based research they have that have been reproduced by others. Many of smaller, fringe companies have purely anecdotal claims. I’m not saying the other large companies don’t as I use many other systems, but Astra has a large volume of evidence based results.

  3. This implant system has excellent research. I have been placing these implants for the last 10 years. Using the appropriate surgical technique for placement in good bone will give you these results. The bone level will stay to the top of the implant with proper patient oral hygiene. You do not need to platform switch with this system. When you place a 9 mm implant you will have 9mm of the implant integrated in bone. you will not lose bone to the first thread. Many of the implant companies are now following astra techs design. Clinically these implants deliver the results they say.

  4. I have gone through the literature and clinical articles of astra implants which proves astra implant to be a good implant. but still lot of study is needed in management of crestal bone loss and implants for individual positions in the arch

  5. I wonder if the 1mm average of bone resorption where they say is the norm have performed studies on platform switched restorations. I use another system, other than Astra, where platform switching is performed on a regular basis with the same results.

  6. Major questions should be answered before accepting this as gospel:

    1. What was the radiographic baseline?

    2. Was it measured at insertion?

    3. Were these w/ one-stage or two-stage implants?

    4. Were there any head-to-head studies w/ other reputable implant cos.?…or just apples-to-oranges comparisons of studies…which is not statistically significant.

    5. Why is this company currently for sale?

Comments are closed.