Straumann® SLActive®

Performance beyond imagination.

Learn more
Contact us
Straumann® SLActive® dental implant surface with hydrophilic nanostructure, designed for accelerated osseointegration and faster healing time.

SEM images on fibrin network, image courtesy of Empa, 2016

SLActive® is Straumann’s high performance surface with extensive healing potential. It stands for high predictability and accelerated osseointegration1-8. Recent studies show an outstanding clinical performance of SLActive® implants even in very challenging treatment protocols and patients with compromised health.9-11

Survival rates

High and consistent survival rates between 95.1% and 98.8% documented by different studies after 5 and 10 year follow-up.14-20
Bone preservation

Average bone loss of 0.5-1 mm after 10 years (baseline defined as implant loading time).15,16
Low prevalence of peri-implantitis

Very low prevalence of peri-implantitis (1.8%) over the 10-year follow-up period.15

20 years elevating excellence with Straumann® SLActive®

Proven by science. Trusted in practice.

Watch video

Understanding Roxolid® SLActive®
from fundamentals to breakthroughs – all in one place

Download a PDF compilation featuring the most influential research.

Free download

Straumann® SLACtIVE® explained

Watch now

WHY are clinicians using Straumann® SLACtIVE®?

Alfonso Rao
United Kingdom

Algirdas Puisys
Lithuania
Watch testimonial

Brochures and videos

Looking for additional information? You'll find them in the Resource Center.

SUPPORTING scientific evidence

Dive in for more

Featured stories on youTooth

Contact us

If you have any questions or would like more information, please complete the form to be contacted by our customer service team. We are happy to assist you.

Data usage agreement*

Read our privacy notice.

Please retype the code above

References

1 Straumann SLActive implants compared to Straumann SLA implants. Lang NP, Salvi GE, Huynh-Ba G, Ivanovski S, Donos N, Bosshardt DD. Early osseointegration to hydrophilic and hydrophobic implant surfaces in humans. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011 Apr;22(4):349-56. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02172.x.
2 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. 
3 De Wild M. Superhydrophilic SLActive® implants. Straumann document 151.52, 2005; 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. Kopf BS, Schipanski A, Rottmar M, Berner S, Maniura-Weber K, Enhanced differentiation of human osteoblasts on Ti surfaces pre-treated with human whole blood. Acta Biomaterialia. 2015 June; 19: 180–190. Kopf BS, Ruch S, Berner S, Spencer ND, Maniura-Weber K, The role of nanostructures and hydrophilicity in osseointegration: In-vitro protein-adsorption and blood-interaction studies. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2015 August; 103 (8): 2661-2672. 
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 Raghavendra S, Wood MC, Taylor TD. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implants. 2005 May–Jun;20(3):425–31. 9.
8 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.
9 Nicolau P, Guerra F, Reis R, Krafft T, Benz K , Jackowski J 10-year results from a randomized controlled multicenter study with immediately and early loaded SLActive implants in posterior jaws. Presented at 25th Annual Scientific Meeting of the European Association of Osseointegration – 29 Sep – 1 Oct 2016, Paris.
10 Nelson, K., Stricker, A., Raguse, J.-D. and Nahles, S. (2016), Rehabilitation of irradiated patients with chemically modified and conventional SLA implants: a clinical clarification. J Oral Rehabil, 43: 871–872. doi:10.1111/joor.12434.
11 Patients treated with dental implants after surgery and radio-chemotherapy of oral cancer. Heberer S, Kilic S, Hossamo J, Raguse J-D, Nelson K. Rehabilitation of irradiated patients with modified and conventional sandblasted, acid-etched implants: preliminary results of a split-mouth study. Clin. Oral Impl. Res. 22, 2011; 546–551.
12 Straumann (2016). SLActive® supports enhanced bone formation in a minipig surgical GBR model with coronal circumferential defects. Unpublished data.