Purpose: The gradual shift from using implants with turned surfaces to implants with
moderately rough surfaces has raised questions regarding the long-term behavior
of the latter. The aim of the present retrospective study was to compare clinical and
radiographic data of the two implant surfaces using the “same mouth” approach.
Materials and Methods: A total of 122 consecutive patients were treated with both
turned and TiUnite implants; however, 26 of these patients could not be reached for
follow-up and were excluded from the study. The remaining 96 patients received 257
turned and 243 TiUnite Brånemark System implants, not necessarily supporting the
same constructions and not necessarily inserted during the same session. Data were
collected up to 10 years of function. Results: During the first 6-year period, 18 turned
implants and 1 TiUnite implant failed, resulting in implant cumulative survival rates
(CSRs) of 93.0% and 99.1% for turned and TiUnite implants, respectively. During the
following years, 1 turned and 3 TiUnite implants failed, resulting in CSRs of 90.3% and
96.6% for the two surfaces, respectively, a significant difference. A small but significant
difference in mean bone level was seen between turned and TiUnite implants.
Conclusion: Implants with turned and TiUnite surfaces showed comparable clinical
and radiographic data during the study period. The early implant failure rate, as well
as the overall failure rate, were significantly reduced when using TiUnite implants.
Int J Prosthodont 2013;26:350–358. doi: 10.11607/ijp.3386