This increases the safety during the early healing phase and leads to a superior structural and functional connection between vital bone and the implant. The SLActive® surface is designed to provide a safer and faster treatment reducing the healing period from 6 – 8 weeks down to 3 – 4 weeks in all indications*.1 – 9
The key in initiating the healing process is the blood clot formation on the implant surface. The hydrophilic and chemically active properties of SLActive® provide a larger accessible surface area for increased blood protein adsorption and fibrin network formation. Those are ideal conditions for blood clot formation and for the initiation of the healing process.1, 2, 3
Building a functional vascular system very early is critical for successful osseointegration. Blood vessel formation is an ongoing process in post-surgical healing. The SLActive® surface has shown a much higher stimulation of blood vessel growth compared to a hydrophobic surface.4, 5
Building a greater bone foundation for implant treatment is crucial. The SLActive® surface supports faster bone maturation6. A higher degree of bone cell mineralization has been described in a preclinical study6 and confirmed by an in vitro study3. Moreover, in human histology the SLActive® healing process has been confirmed to be faster, as demonstrated by the greater bone-to-implant contact (BIC) after 2 weeks and the significantly greater BIC after 4 weeks.7
Most implant failures occur in the critical early healing phase between 2 – 4 weeks after implant placement8. SLActive® is designed to deliver better osseointegration properties by achieving secondary stability sooner than hydrophobic surfaces, thereby reduces the risks during the early healing time and eliminates the stability dip.9
1 Rupp F, Scheideler L, Olshanska N, de Wild M, Wieland M, Geis-Gerstorfer J. Enhancing surface free energy and hydrophilicity through chemical modification of microstructured titanium implant surfaces. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research A, 76(2):323-334, 2006. 2 De Wild M. Superhydrophilic SLActive® implants. Straumann document 151.52, 2005 3 Katharina Maniura. Laboratory for Materials – Biology Interactions Empa, St. Gallen, Switzerland Protein and blood adsorption on Ti and TiZr implants as a model for osseointegration. EAO 22nd Annual Scientific Meeting, October 17 – 19 2013, Dublin 4 Schwarz, F., et al., Bone regeneration in dehiscence-type defects at non-submerged and submerged chemically modified (SLActive®) and conventional SLA® titanium implants: an immunohistochemical study in dogs. J Clin.Periodontol. 35.1 (2008): 64–75. 5 Rausch-fan X, Qu Z, Wieland M, Matejka M, Schedle A. Differentiation and cytokine synthesis of human alveolar osteoblasts compared to osteoblast-like cells (MG63) in response to titanium surfaces. Dental Materials 2008 Jan;24(1):102-10. Epub 2007 Apr 27. 6 Schwarz F, Herten M, Sager M, Wieland M, Dard M, Becker J. Histological and immunohistochemical analysis of initial and early osseous integration at chemically modified and conventional SLA® titanium implants: Preliminary results of a pilot study in dogs. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 11(4): 481-488, 2007. 7 Lang, N.P., et al., Early osseointegration to hydrophilic and hydrophobic implant surfaces in humans. Clin Oral Implants.Res 22.4 (2011): 349–56. 8 Raghavendra S, Wood MC, Taylor TD. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 2005 May–Jun;20(3):425–31. 9 Oates TW, Valderrama P, Bischof M, Nedir R, Jones A, Simpson J, Toutenburg H, Cochran DL. Enhanced implant stability with a chemically modified SLA® surface: a randomized pilot study. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 2007;22(5):755–760.