Implant Solutions

The Neodent implant system offers a wide range of products designed to help clinicians deliver solutions to patients of all clinical needs and bone types.

ESTHETICALLY SIMPLE

  • High bone maintenance supporting a natural and esthetic emergence profile.(2)
  • One prosthetic connection for more simplicity.
  • Proven Cone Morse enhancing exceptional long-term mechanical stability.

The Solution For Narrow Restorative Spaces

  • 2.9mm small diameter implant developed for challenging esthetic areas;
  • Designed to preserve bone and tissue in limited interdental spaces;
  • Versatile prosthetic options: single-unit, cement-retained, multi-unit
  • screw-retained to multi-unit overdentures;

The WS line of implants is particularly suited to deal with situations where there is reduced bone availability.


  • Zygomatic CM
  • Zygomatic He

Acqua, the hydrophilic surface, is designed to increase wettability

Regenerative Solutions 

REFERENCES AND PUBLICATIONS

1. Sartori IAM, Latenek RT, Budel LA, Thomé G, Bernardes SR, Tiossi R. Retrospective analysis of 2,244 implants and the importance of follow-up in impantology. Journal of Research in Dentistry. 2014 Nov-Dez;2(6):555-564.
2. Martin C, Thomé G, Melo AC, Fontão FN. Peri-implant bone response following immediate implants placed in the esthetic zone and with immediate provisionalization-a case series study. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015 Jun;19(2):157-63.
3. Barros RR, Novaes AB Jr, Muglia VA, Lezzi G, Piattelli A. Influence of interimplant distances and placement depth on peri-implant bone remodeling of adjacent and immediately loaded Morse cone connection implants: a histomorphometric study in dogs. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2010;21(4):371-8.
4. Castro DS, Araujo MA, Benfatti CA, Araujo Cdos R, Piattelli A, Perrotti V, et al. Comparative histological and histomorphometrical evaluation of marginal bone resorption around external hexagon and Morse cone implants: an experimental study in dogs. Implant Dent. 2014;23(3):270-6.
5. Novaes AB Jr, Barros RR, Muglia VA, Borges GJ. Influence of interimplant distances and placement depth on papilla formation and crestal resorption: a clinical and radiographic study in dogs. J Oral Implantol. 2009;35(1):18-27.
6. Siqueira RAC. Avaliação do índice de sucesso e comportamento dos tecidos periimplantares de implantes cone morse equicrestais ou subcrestais em arcos inferiores. [master’s dissertation on internet]. [Curitiba(Brazil)]: ILAPEO; 2013. [cited 28 out 2015] 126p. Available from: http://www.ilapeo.com.br/Monografias_e_Dissertacoes/Dissertacoes_turma2011/Rafael_Amorin_Cavalcanti_de_Siqueira.pdf
7. Sotto-Maior BS, Lima Cde A, Senna PM, Camargos Gde V, Del Bel Cury AA. Biomechanical evaluation of subcrestal dental implants with different bone anchorages. Braz Oral Res. 2014;28.