The results of regular follow-up of various endosseous titanium implant systems are presented together with an overview of the results with Tübingen Frialit® aluminum oxide ceramic implants. Using ITI implants, pathological findings for sulcus depth and peri-implant bone degradation were found significantly more frequently than with the other titanium implants. Clinical mobility was present significantly more frequently with TPS implants than with the IMZ system, whereas an increase in the depth of the peri-implant sulcus alone occurred significantly more frequently with the IMZ and ITI than with the TPS implant system. The observation period for Brånemark implants is too short to permit final evaluation. However, pathological findings have not occurred to date.
Keywords: Brånemark implant, endosseous implant, IMZ implant, ITI implant, recall, titanium, TPS implant, Tübingen Frialit implant