Surfaces of the Straumann® Dental Implant System 

Redefining the boundaries of what is possible.

From the industry benchmark SLA® to the high-performance SLActive® implant surface, Straumann has constantly raised the bar to set new standards in osseointegration. ZLA®, developed for the Straumann® PURE Ceramic Implant, continues this tradition.

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

Straumann® SLActive®

Performance beyond imagination.

SLActive® is Straumann’s high performance surface for high predictability and accelerated osseointegration. Recent studies show an outstanding clinical performance of SLActive® implants even in very challenging treatment protocols.9-11

  • Predictability

    Implant survival rate in immediate loading after 10 years: 98.2%.9

  • Osseointegration

    Reduced healing period from 6-8 weeks down to 3-4 weeks in all indications.*

* compared to SLA®. Indications: from single tooth to edentulous.

How can we help you?

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

Straumann® SLA®

Longevity and efficiency in daily practice.

The classic SLA® surface, introduced in 1998, is based on a large-grit sandblasting technique that generates a macro-roughness on the titanium surface. This is followed by acid-etching that superposes a micro-roughness. The resulting topography offers an ideal structure for cell attachment. Many peer-reviewed clinical and preclinical studies have confirmed its strong long-term performance and reliability, making it one of the most documented surfaces in dental implantology. According to an independent study, the odds ratio of developing peri-implantitis was more than three times higher in patients treated with competitor implant systems compared with Straumann® implants with SLA® surfaces20

  • Survival rates

    High and consistent survival rates >99% over  5 and 10 year follow-up13, 16, 17, 18.

  • Bone preservation

    Average bone loss of 0.5-1 mm after 10 years (baseline defined as implant loading time).

  • Low prevalence of peri-implantitis

    Very low prevalence of peri-implantitis (1.8%)13 
    over the 10-year follow-up period.

How can we help you?

Straumann® ZLA®

A surface with outstanding osseointegration features.

Straumann® ZLA® is the surface of the Straumann® PURE Ceramic Implant System and features revolutionary osseointegrative properties that are equivalent to the well-established original Straumann® SLA® surface.

  • Structure

    Similar in macro- and micro-roughness to SLA®.

  • Osseointegration

    Healing time comparable to SLA®.

  • Esthetics

    Less plaque attachment – an important factor for long-term implant success.

Contact Us to Learn More

Confirmation*

Straumann collects your information to facilitate the commercial relationship, contact you regarding future product offerings and promotion and all other permissible business purposes. Please see our Privacy Policy for more information.

Resources

Documents

No resources found.

References

View selected scientific literature about SLActive® and SLA®

SLActive® 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. SLA® 13 Buser D, Janner SF, Wittneben JG, Bragger U, Ramseier CA, Salvi GE. 10-year survival and success rates of 511 titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface: a retrospective study in 303 partially edentulous patients. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012 Dec;14(6):839-51. 14 Fischer K, Stenberg T.: Prospective 10-year cohort study based on a randomized controlled trial (RCT) on implant-supported full-arch maxillary prostheses. Part 1: sandblasted and acid-etched implants and mucosal tissue. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2012 Dec;14(6):808-15. 15 van Velzen FJ, Ofec R, Schulten EA, Ten Bruggenkate CM,.10-year survival rate and the incidence of peri-implant disease of 374 titanium dental implants with a SLA surface: a prospective cohort study in 177 fully and partially edentulous patients. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Oct;26(10):1121-8. 16 Cochran DL, Jackson JM, Bernard JP, ten Bruggenkate CM, Buser D, Taylor TD, Weingart D, Schoolfield JD, Jones AA, Oates TW Jr. A 5-year prospective multicenter study of early loaded titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011 Nov-Dec;26(6):1324-32. 17 Cochran D, Oates T, Morton D, Jones A, Buser D, Peters F. Clinical field trial examining an implant with a sand-blasted, acid-etched surface. J Periodontol. 2007 Jun;78(6):974-82. 18 Bornstein MM, Schmid B, Belser UC, Lussi A, Buser D. Early loading of non-submerged titanium implants with a sandblasted and acid-etched surface. 5-year results of a prospective study in partially edentulous patients. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2005 Dec;16(6):631-8. 19 Roccuzzo M1, Aglietta M, Bunino M, Bonino L. Early loading of sandblasted and acid-etched implants: a randomized-controlled double-blind split-mouth study. Five-year results. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2008 Feb;19(2):148-52. 20 Derks J, Schaller D, Håkansson J, Wennström JL, Tomasi C, Berglundh T. Effectiveness of Implant Therapy Analyzed in a Swedish Population: Prevalence of Peri-implantitis. J Dent Res. 2016 Jan;95(1):43-9. doi ZLA® 21 Bormann KH, Gellrich NC, Kniha H, Dard M, Wieland M, Gahlert M. Biomechanical evaluation of a microstructured zirconia implant by a removal torque comparison with a standard Ti-SLA implant. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Oct;23(10):1210-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02291.x. Epub 2011 Nov 14. 22 Gahlert M, Roehling S, Sprecher CM, Kniha H, Milz S, Bormann K. In vivo performance of zirconia and titanium implants: a histomorphometric study in mini pig maxillae. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Mar;23(3):281-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02157.x. Epub 2011 Aug 2. 23 Gahlert M1, Röhling S, Wieland M, Eichhorn S, Küchenhoff H, Kniha H A comparison study of the osseointegration of zirconia and titanium dental implants. A biomechanical evaluation in the maxilla of pigs. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2010 Dec;12(4):297-305. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00168.x.

ZLA® 23 Roehling S, Astasov-Frauenhoffer M, Hauser-Gerspach, Braissant O, Woelfler H, et a., In Vitro Biofilm Formation On Titanium And Zirconia Implant Surfaces, J Periodontol. 2016 Oct 7:1-16. [Epub ahead of print] DOI: 10.1902/jop.2016.160245