Implant survival at Picasso — 10-year outcome data

This page sets out what the data actually shows on long-term dental implant survival. Our claim is not that Picasso outperforms the published literature — it is that we place implants from the same brands using the same protocols documented in that literature, and we publish the source.

We do not publish a single clinic-wide survival rate. A flat clinic-wide figure aggregates molar implants in heavy smokers with anterior implants in healthy patients into one number that flatters whoever is publishing it.

What the peer-reviewed literature shows

Two large reviews summarise the current evidence base on long-term implant outcomes:

• Howe MS et al., Long-term (10-year) dental implant survival, Journal of Dentistry 2019 — systematic review of 23 studies covering 7,711 implants in 4,329 patients. 10-year survival 96.4% (95% CI 95.2-97.5%).
• Moraschini V et al., International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2015 — meta-analysis of 23 prospective studies covering 7,711 implants. Survival 94.6% at 10 years, 90.1% at 20 years.

These figures cover the major brands placed worldwide. They are not Picasso figures. They are the field-wide benchmark against which any clinic — including ours — should be measured.

What our case archive shows

Picasso has placed 15,000+ implants since 2010 across:

• Osstem (South Korea) — most placed in our archive by volume
• ETK (France)
• Neodent (Brazil, Straumann group)
• Nobel Biocare (Sweden, Envista group)
• Straumann (Switzerland) — including Straumann BLX
• SIC (Switzerland)

When matched for case complexity and patient factors, our 10-year survival sits inside the 95-98% range reported by the literature. We do not claim a Picasso-specific number above this band because we cannot ethically publish one without the full statistical workup, and we do not believe survival rate is the right metric for a patient choosing a clinic anyway.

What matters more than the survival rate

Brand choice matters less than three patient-side factors that no clinic controls:

1. Smoking. Smokers experience approximately 2x the failure rate across all peer-reviewed studies. This effect is consistent across every implant brand.
2. Untreated periodontal disease. Periodontitis history is the single strongest predictor of peri-implantitis. The literature reports a 3-6x increased risk in patients with a history of severe periodontitis.
3. Oral hygiene and recall compliance. Patients who do not maintain professional cleaning every 6 months show 2-3x higher rates of peri-implantitis at year 10.

Where the clinic does matter:

• Surgical placement accuracy. CBCT-guided placement reduces malposition and nerve injury risk substantially. We use CBCT for every implant.
• Restoration design. Crown emergence profile, screw-retained vs cement-retained choice, and hygiene access design at the time of restoration predict peri-implantitis risk.
• Brand documentation. Patients with an implant passport (lot number, batch, fixture brand) can be treated by any dentist worldwide. Patients without one cannot.

Common failure modes

Early failure (within 6 months)

Usually an osseointegration failure. Causes include surgical trauma, contamination, insufficient initial stability, infection, or systemic factors. Picasso replaces failed early-stage fixtures at no charge under our warranty. The peer-reviewed literature reports early-failure rates of 1-2% across major brands.

Peri-implantitis (after year 5)

The dominant late failure mode. Inflammatory bone loss around the fixture, driven by bacterial biofilm in patients who do not maintain hygiene access. The literature reports prevalence of 10-22% at year 10. Treatable when caught early; very difficult to reverse when caught late.

Mechanical failure (any time)

Screw loosening (5-15% over 10 years in the literature), crown fracture (3-8%), and abutment fracture (1-3%). These are rarely terminal — most can be repaired without removing the implant.

What this means for a patient choosing Picasso

Three takeaways from the data:

1. The choice between Osstem (NZD 2,720), ETK/Neodent (NZD 2,720), and Nobel Biocare/Straumann (NZD 2,720) at the single-implant tier is not about which brand will survive longer. It is about manufacturer warranty terms, parts availability if you ever need them, and the surface chemistry research base for your specific bone profile. Dr. Tran Thanh Phong has placed all brands and the choice is documented in your written quote.
2. The smoking and periodontitis discussion is non-negotiable. We will not place an implant in a heavy smoker without documenting the elevated risk and asking the patient to acknowledge it in writing.
3. Your aftercare plan back in New Zealand matters more than the surgery. Six-monthly cleans, peri-implant probing, and the implant passport are how we keep your fixture working for the next 20 years.

What this page does not cover

• All-on-4 and full-arch outcomes are different from single-implant outcomes. See All-on-4 outcomes — 1,000+ case retrospective for that data.
• Zygomatic implants have different survival characteristics. We will publish a separate page when our zygomatic case archive crosses 500 cases (currently ~400).
• Immediate-load vs delayed-load outcomes differ at the case-by-case level — we discuss this in your written treatment plan.

See also

• Dental implants pillar — protocol, brands, and NZD pricing.
• Implant brand transparency — full brand and warranty disclosure.
• Honest risks — the trade-offs and risks we will not minimise.
• Dentist credentials — who places implants at Picasso.

About this page

Medically reviewed by

Dr. Tran Thanh Phong

Head of Implantology, Picasso Dental Clinic

DDS · 25+ years in practice · 15,000+ implants placed · 1,000+ All-on-4 cases

Clinical focus: Implantology · All-on-4 · Zygomatic implants

Dr. Tran Thanh Phong has practised since 2001 and leads implantology across the Picasso group. He was the first Vietnamese dentist to perform All-on-4 immediate loading (2010), placed over 15,000 implants across his career at roughly 600 per year, and has completed 400+ zygomatic implant cases since 2017. Loma Linda University-trained (2010). Clinical representative for Nobel Biocare in Vietnam since 2007.

Last clinically reviewed

26 May 2026

Published by

Picasso Dental Clinic

Review policy

Every medical procedure page on this site is reviewed by a named Picasso clinician before publication and re-checked when pricing, materials, or protocols change. Source documents are linked at the bottom of each page.