Mass Failures

Just ran into a Dr. that has only placed 6 Intra-Lock Implants and "ALL" of them failed on a perfectly healthy patient. The kicker was that when he discussed the case with his Rep and the Company, they completely blew him off and did not even stand behind the Implants for replacement. Great business model!

 

You really can't blame the implants themselves for failing. A lot has to do with the technique that the dentist uses to place the implants. It is quite possible that the dentist didn't use the proper speed and torque when creating the pilot hole and placing the implant. If I were the rep I wouldn't replace the implants either. I would make sure that the dentist knows the correct technique and selects the right candidate for implants. Without the knowledge of the dentist's education (or even if he was paying attention in class) I would have to blame this failure on the technique and not the implants themselves. In the future I would have the rep recommend a lab to the dentist that is familiar with mini's so that they may guide them through the entire process. There is a learning curve but once the dentist gets the hang of things everything ends on working out and the patients leave extremely satisfied. Providing mini's to patients can be extremely beneficial to the patient and the dentist if they are properly placed IMO!

 

I bet the company blames the doctor for not knowing how to place implants. 100% failure is pretty hard to spin in a positive way. Hopefully the doctor relays his experience on Dentaltown and the market realizes you can't bet a patients outcome on an unproven implant. As a doctor it's just not worth the risk when there are plenty of predictable proven implant available.
This is a very disturbing outcome.

 

This particular Dr. is a GP who has been placing conventional Dental Implants for over 8 years. He uses a Premium System but tried Intra-Lock on a few cases. This particular case was not with minis but with Intra-Locks "conventional Implants". Blossom, Osseon, the whole bit. Outcome with 6 Implants = 100% failure on a healthy patient. All protocols where followed so please don't blame technique ever again unless you know the details. Who are you to question the Dr.'s surgical technique? Either way, any respectable company should replace the failed Implants which Intra-Lock did not do also. You guys be the judge of this but I think its fair to say you just lost a customer.

 

Its expected that the company would blame the surgical technique and not the product. Other issues that should be looked at is whether all the implants came from the same lot #, if there was any bone grafting involved prior to or at the time of surgery, when did the failures occur, and when did they occur.
Regardless of the cause, a company focused on the customer, would replace all the implants, no questions asked. If the company had to absorb the cost of six implants, it pales in comparison of the cost, for both the patient and the doctor, to loose six implants. My concern would be for the well being of the patient. What patient had to suffer through because a company aggressively marketed a possible unproven surgical implant to a doctor. A large company has the resources and understands that when failures occur, the doctor must be compensated in order to maintain the business relationship. These people at Intra-Lock blame the doctor, and maybe even the patient. What they don't do is blindly stand behind their product. Huge error in the competitive market that implants face. Hopefully this doctor files complaint with the FDA, and obviously the free market will punish unethical players like Intra-Lock. They not only mismanaged their damage control, they exasperated the original damage.

 

Folks, we still don't know the whole story. We don't have ct or any patient history to determine why the implants didn't integrate, nothing failed here, there weren't any broken implants (all we know is that the patient was "healthy"). If the implant were to break or snap I would think that a full refund or replacement be in order, but for an implant not to integrate, this is a result of placement technique, very dense bone, or rejection. I'm going to bet the dentist didn't follow the protocol 100%, the patient had dense bone, or he just plain sucks.

You cant say IL offers an inadequate product with nothing to back your reasoning other than "the doctor told you so"..... was this the first time this dentist placed IL implants? has he ever placed them before? With that type of attitude no company would ever survive, and they would be giving away free implants all day long....

Lets get the details!...

I have had docs using IL implants for the past 6 years with great success, in fact they never want to switch to or even try another brand. As with any implant placement there is a learning curve. Even if you are the most experienced dentist at placing "premium" implants and you switch to another brand the protocol can be completely different. Because the dentist is comfortable with the way he has been placing his premium implants, some of his technique may be transferred to the way he is placing the IL implants, which is wrong... How do you know the dentist followed the protocol to a tee, were you sitting next to him during surgery?!? I do the few first surgeries...

 

Does anyone know if these six failures were in one patient or multiple patients?

 

Multiple.One surgery the rep was present directing the doctor on the proper surgical protocol. Still failed.

 

People, none of this is true. All lies my a couple of ex-reps who were fired.

Those guys are the "MASS FAILURES" in sales and in life!!!!

50 implant companies and they still can't find a job!

 

"Multiple Implants. One surgery the rep was present directing the doctor on the proper surgical protocol. Still failed."

For the most part thats true. 6 Implants, 1 healthy patient. Not sure if the Rep was there but Dr. followed protocol. All 6 Implants failed. Company blamed the Dr. and would not replace the implants.

This is not an ex-rep that was fired. Just a friend of the Dr. who got screwed here. You guys figure it out.

 

Its very convenient to blame "ex-reps" for the failures. The truth is the implants are failing and it has nothing to do with any ex reps, it has to do with the product. The company knows about these failures, someone from th company posted here in response. This Jose who posts here without direction or authorization from company management best be careful what he posts. He is a loose cannon and making false claims like these implant failures never happened could really cause his company some trouble.

 

How do you know they arent working? Do you have detectives watching them? Are you that obsessed? Why did you hire two losers with no ability and no skill? Is that part of the Intra-Lock business plan? You Hire compleltely incompetent sales employees? If that is your plan your a bigger fool than you,make yourself out to be by posting here. If anyone is disgruntled it sounds like you are- a pseudo manager whose sales team all left voluntarily because the they realized the company was systematic abortion. Now products are failing big time and even that is the ex employees doing.

 

So, the wanna-be bigtime Zimmer tool hits on GP's now to get them place his Nizz-screws. I can't say this is actually an upgrade in product (from Intra-Lock) or rep. Implant Direct "Lite", maybe.

This winner is running out of threads to hijack and report his "true stories" from the streets. Sad situation for Zimmer when the Intra-Lock thread actually gets less credible than it already is.

 

I'd be more concerned if 6 implants failed consecutively in a small subset of different patients. 6 implants in one patient could be a lot of things. Infection, the implant itself, technique, post care, etc.

 

I didn't have any failures with any of the doctors that were placing Intra-Lock. I did however run into crestal bone loss. Mostly with the tapered implant. Pressure necrosis most likely do to under-prepping the site.

 

Part of the issue here is that the market definition off failure seems to be far different than Intra-Locks definition of failure. Jose has stated that that because the implant didnt fracture these six implants being discussed would not be considered failures. Anyone with dental mplant experience understands that a failure is anytime an implant fails to integrate. Of course fracturing would be a failure but more commonly a failure involves infection, and then failure to integrate. Most reputable implant companies will replace any implant that has been placed and then failed to integrate. This intra-lock is obviously clueless to the standard most implant companies consider a failure. Another example of poor management, lack of experience and knowledge of a companies market.