DOCUMENTED CLINICAL SUCCESS Implants with MP-1 HA enjoy outstanding clinical outcomes that further demonstrate the quality and performance of the coating.
100%
100%
97.9%
96.2%
STUDY8 – 429 IMPLANTS
100%
STUDY7– 245 IMPLANTS
CUMULATIVE IMPLANT SURVIVAL RATE 100%
99.6% 93.2%
96.6%
0%
1 Year
5 Years
Documented clinical survival rates for 5,099 Zimmer MP-1 HA coated Implants: • I mplant survival rate mean 98.9% (range from 93.2% to 100%) • F ollow-up times range from 12 to 108 months (mean = 56.6 months)
STUDY11 – 537 IMPLANTS
STUDY10– 3811 IMPLANTS
STUDY9 – 60 IMPLANTS
20%
STUDY6 – 52 IMPLANTS
40%
STUDY5– 19 IMPLANTS
60%
STUDY4 – 97 IMPLANTS
80%
9 Years
ZIMMER DENTAL
HA TECHNOLOGY CHAMPION Zimmer Dental has led the industry in hydroxyapatite (HA) technology for over 30 years. Dental literature has widely documented the ability of HA coatings to increase bone-to-implant contact (BIC), enhance osseointegration and provide a strong platform to bind with the bone.1-2 The innovative MP-1 HA coating is a technological advancement in both stability and performance. The proprietary MP-1 HA coating is unique to Zimmer with features superior to competitive HA coatings.
STUDY7– 245 IMPLANTS
STUDY6 – 52 IMPLANTS
STUDY5– 19 IMPLANTS
•
STUDY4 – 97 IMPLANTS
80% ZIMMER MP-1 HA BENEFITS 60% BETTER OSTEOCONDUCTIVE POTENTIAL
96.2%
99.6% 93.2%
93.2%
96.6%
STUDY11 – 537 IMPLANTS
97.9%
STUDY11 – 221 IMPLANTS
100%
STUDY10– 3811 IMPLANTS
100%
STUDY9 – 60 IMPLANTS
100%
STUDY8 – 429 IMPLANTS
100%
Highly crystalline HA coatings exhibit more bone apposition than those with lower crystallinity. Zimmer’s MP-140% HA with up to 97% crystalline HA content is significantly higher than the 45-73% crystalline content of the competitive HA coatings tested.3
•
20%
LESS RESORPTION
To minimize resorption, Zimmer’s HA coating is subjected to a proprietary MP-1 heat treatment that 0% 1 Year 5 Years 9 Years decreases the amorphous content down to 3%1, significantly lower than the 29-62% amorphous content of other commercial HA coatings.3
•
MORE STABILITY A coating of high crystallinity and low dissolution rate lends stability to the implant bed.2 Calcium dissolution for Zimmer MP-1 HA is lower than other commercially available HA coatings.3
100% Amorphous Content
3% 55%
27%
23%
97%
80% 73%
60% 40% Crystallinity
40%
77%
60% 45%
20% 0%
Competitive implants
Untreated HA implant
Zimmer MP-1 treated HA implant
EARLY SECONDARY BETTER THAN SLACT 100%
Amorphous Content
3%
55%
40%
27%
23%
97%
80% 60% 40%
77%
73%
60%
45%
BIOMECHANICAL EVALUATIONS12 Crystallinity
20%
A study was performed in sheep to compare the stability and bone tissue response of Zimmer’s 0% and implants with Straumann’s SLActive surface. After 3 and 6 weeks of early MP-1 HA implants Competitive implants Untreated Zimmer MP-1 HA implant treated healing, results demonstrated that Zimmer’s MP-1 HA implants achieved significantly better HA implant
stability and osseointegration than Straumann’s SLActive implants. This study3% showed the 100%
following benefits: Amorphous Content
55%
40%
27%
80%
100%
300
MP-1 HABONE FIXATION12 GREATER
91%
23%
SLActive 60%
77%
73%
250
• Zimmer’s MP-1 HA implants achieved 60% 80%
97%
MP-1 HA
262.1
SLActive
significantly higher reverse torque 45%(p<0.01) values after 340% and 6 weeks 60% MP-1 HA than Straumann’s SLActive Surface in SLActive 51.8% Crystallinity this study. 20% 45.3% 40%
Torque (Ncm)
81.3%
217.2
200
MP-1 HA
164.9
150 100
80%
O
Zimmer MP-1 treated HA implant 3
6
Healing Time (weeks)
300
SLActive
250
MP-1 HA
51.8%
40%
SLActive
45.3%
20%
Bone Volume Fraction
164.9
150
• Bone-to-implant contact (BIC) andSLActive bone volume fraction indicate of an implant physically 118.1 anchored in 100 evidence MP-1 HA bone. 50
Bone-to-Implant Contact
262.1
• Zimmer’s MP-1 HA implants achieved significantly higher SLActive BIC and bone volume fraction (BV/TV) (p<0.05) after217.2 3 and 200 6 weeks than Straumann’sMP-1 SLActive Surface in this study. HA
81.3%
60%
0%
SLActive Untreated HA implant 42.1
12 HIGHER BONE TO IMPLANT CONTACT MP-1 HA
MP-1 HA
91%
78.9
0
Bone Volume Fraction
Torque (Ncm)
100%
Bone-to-Implant Contact
118.1
MP-1 HA
• Reverse torque values demonstrate the 0% Competitive implants 50 degree of bone fixation to implant 20% surfaces. 0%
SLActive
0
78.9
SLActive
42.1 O
3 Healing Time (weeks)
6
STABILITY TIVE HISTOLOGICAL EVALUATION12 Bone response to the implant surfaces was conducted by histological evaluations. MP-1 HA coated surfaces exhibited no adverse tissue responses both at 3 and 6 weeks in this study. New bone with osteoclastic and osteoblastic activity indicated active bone remodeling. Interstitial tissues in the HA implant interface region was predominantly mature while the SLActive surface exhibited a less mature marrow closer to implant surface in this study.12
BETTER BONE DENSITY12
MP-1 HA AT 6 WEEKS Newly formed trabecular bone was thick and showed an increase in bone density compared to SLActive in this study.
SLACTIVE AT 6 WEEKS Observed bone density was variable at threaded implant surfaces and within cross sections compared to MP-1 HA in this study.