Surfing the linking Gap

After macroscopic to microscopic to nanoscopic and back we’ve heard everything ad nauseam…and so one must be desperate looking for a to lecturer – what we are notorwe are on the way to widen our horizon – to the nanosphere…————————————————-Dr. B. Aronsson states (by mean of nice slides and literature) that:

  • 20 % of all set Implants will make troubles (bone loss, esthetic loss etc.) Because:
  • There is a microscopic GAP between bone to implant interface, that’s due to the fact that:
  • The titanium-oxid surface of our daily set implants is „DIRTY“ – that is to say, contaminated with all kind of metallic debris (potassium, copper, zinc a.o.) no matter if sophisticated or copy-implants. That’s a question of awareness (or the influence of a physicist, like the lecturer…)
  • pure TiO would be hydrophilic,
  • therefore we need a soluble agent to clean the surface:
  • Surflink is a secret agent who will do this job; 

ASIO members think it would be preferable to have this agent as a treatment of periimplantitis instead of putting it on an whatever implant. Because a integration faster again of the implant isn’t the thing we are looking for.

  • once you have a gap there is no reintegration. So the clinical relevance of this surface treatment is to protect the interface of braking and hindering the entry of bacterias nor fibroblasts…
  • shows  nice pix of success aft short period of time *sheeps, rats, ./ longest study 52 weeks with SLA (untreated) to SLA (with surflink) no longer data available so far.
  • implants treated with surflink would be less prone to bone loss, even at smokers or other health compromized patients.

Dr. Aronsson declares that the company is not able to give us the surflink right now. – So the secret agent stays secret and the whereabouts are still unknow…

Login to your account