Controversies Issues that affect the dental implant dentistry Core-Vent Clinical Reality vs Marketing Rhetoric 1987 FULL SCREEN × Core-Vent Clinical Reality vs Marketing Rhetoric 1987 FULL SCREEN Paragon Implant Controversies Implant Connections and Surfaces 1997 FULL SCREEN × Paragon Implant Controversies Implant Connections and Surfaces FULL SCREEN Technology report for discerning dentist from 1983 through the end of the 1990’s FULL SCREEN × Core-Vent Controversies in Implantology FULL SCREEN Open Letter to Nobel Biocare 2007 FULL SCREEN × Core-Vent System Original Article 1982 FULL SCREEN Limitations of Zimmer Dental's TM Implant FULL SCREEN Buser Exchange for Newsletter FULL SCREEN Since 1982, I have been speaking out on the many controversies and issues that affect implant dentistry. Editorials, open letters to the profession and e-mail exchanges have been the forums for these discussions. The first major controvery arose in 1984 with Nobel's open letter to Oral Surgeons and Prosthodontists objecting to Core-Vent's references to and extrapolation of Branemark's research. I believe you will find these discussions informative and entertaining. Dr. Niznick's Lecture at 2018 Global Implant Summmit Click to download slides: Part 2 Controversies in Implant Dentistrys Controversies DR. NIZNICK RESPONDS TO CONTROVERSIAL POSTS ■ Controversies: 1982-1997 Core-Vent Corp ■ Controversies: 1997 - 2001 Paragon Implant Co ■ Controversies: 2004 -2010 Implant Direct LLC ■ Controversies: 2011-2013 Implant Direct Sybron Legacy System vs Tapered ScrewVent True Advantage Video 7:55 min SwishPlus vs Straumann Reality Check Video 5:38 min Replant vs Replace Reality Check Video 3:50 min InterActive vs NobelActive True Advantage Video 8:54 min Dr. Niznicks 2018 GIS Lecture Video Answers Controversial Questions in Implant Dentistry What is the origin of and rational for NobelBiocare's On1 Healing Collar/Abutment? What is the preferred features of an implant regarding threads, taper & cutting grooves? What constitutes an effective self-tapping design for a dental implant? What companies have contributed to innovations? Should the neck of the implant seal the crestal opening of the surgical site? Do deeper threads alone increase initial stability or is the surgical protocol more important? Can premium implant prices ($400+) be justified by claims of faster healing or increased success? Does Nobel's All-on-3 Treefoil solution for the edentulous lower jaw obviate angled implants? What are design advantages of Implant Direct's InterActive implants vs NobelActive? Does having only one diameter internal shaft compromise emergence profile? Does a smooth neck on an implant reduce peri-implantitis or just encourage bone loss? Is there any advantage to a 74-84° lead in bevel compared to the 45° of the 1986 Screw-Vent? What is the ideal implant surfaces? Machine → AlO₂ Blasted/Etched → HA → SBM → Anodized Does HA coating increase attachment strength and does trabecular metal reduce initial stability? Is there any clinical significance to Straumann's claim that SLActive surface reduces healing time? Are the obvious disadvatages of subcrestal placement justifed by any perceived advatages? Is platform switching inherent in all conical connection implants? Does it reduce bone loss? What are the advantages of using a straight step drill vs a tapered drill for inserting a tapered implant? Can the use of a bone tap be eliminated with the placement of self-taping implants? What contributes more to implant fractures: choice of material, implant design or both? Are Nobel's efforts to discourge use of Implant Direct's Nobel compatible abutments justified?