Guided Surgery for Zeramex XT – Experiences of Dr. Rouven Wagner

How long has your practice in the heart of Dortmund been dealing with ceramic implants?

Why are you targeting our situation – or do you think fewer patients in the Ruhr area are interested in ceramic restorations than in the Lake Constance region or in the Munich area? I studied in Leipzig and Prof. Ludwig Graf and Dr. Wolfram Knöfler with titanium alternatives very early on. I also encountered the topic during my oral surgery training and my master’s degree at the IMC with Prof. Ulrich Joos. In practice, I was able to observe very early on how well the soft tissue reacted to the material. I finally wrote my master’s thesis on ceramic implants and the studies show comparable success rates for the BIC – with just a little more patience during the healing process – to the titanium implants. I ended up at Dentalpoint and Zeramex because the material properties really appealed to me completely convinced and have also proven themselves extensively in practice. The absolute absence of metal with the carbon fiber reinforced Vicarbo screw also caters perfectly to alternative practitioners and the prosthetic flexibility is aesthetically pleasing. In addition, I don’t have to bend my usual workflow.

And how long have you been implementing digital processes in practice?

Right from the start – I think that should apply to all colleagues of my generation. We have all gained our experience with optical impressions and CAD/CAM processes and have often been able to get to know a number of digital tools and their advantages at university. Since Dentalpoint developed and offered the Zeramex Digital Solutions very quickly, the supply of ceramic implants also adapts seamlessly to our well-established, digital processes.

Some argue that ceramic implants and digital workflows are a philosophical contradiction…

Why should that be? Ceramic implants have now arrived very successfully in everyday clinical practice in many practices, and many of them now also include digital processes. I see absolutely no contradiction here and I am rather pleased that Zeramex was clever enough to secure intelligent digital services via cooperation partners at an early stage.

Where do you see the particular advantages of the Genius surgical templates from 2Ingis?

I had been in contact with manufacturers of surgical templates for a long time, but was sometimes surprised at how inflexible and not very open-minded many a large house turned out to be. I also didn’t like being pressed into closed concepts. 2ingis was a revelation for me – the system is totally open, I remain as flexible as possible, keep the full field of vision and can decide intraoperatively whether a punch is enough for me or whether I should open it up. Even the water cooling is super solved there. The only investment is the special angle piece from W & H. I think that’s very manageable. Especially in the demanding front tooth area, which is of course a favorite region for ceramic implants, I’m just a lot safer with it.

Did Dentalpoint’s consistent focus on digital procedures also influence your decision in favor of the Zeramex implants?

First and foremost, the implant itself convinced me. The digital processes are not just a gimmick, but a real blessing in certain situations. For example, I’m absolutely thrilled with the 3.5 mm Zeramex implant for narrow gaps in the lower jaw – try making an analog impression of that! With scan posts, this is a walk in the park for my patient and I. We also have the best results with interdisciplinary treatments in combination with orthodontic care. With an analog impression, you may tear out half the orthodontic appliance or change it far too much. As you can see, digital procedures and ceramic implants are not only not a contradiction in terms, but an excellent addition to our treatment options.