Any truth to Zimmer's trabecular implant?

[Anonymous]

So you're saying SC, the Florida RM wasn't demoted? Uh, ok. No one would CHOOSE to take a territory over an RM spot unless they were in way over their head. Hence, demotion.

Anyone would choose to take a senior level territory position if they were making more money there. SC is a top performer (Top 10 ranked). The guy was an RM for 3 years. If he was in over his head Z would have pulled the rip cord a long time ago. Facts are facts in SC's case. If you know anyone in the company you know this to be the absolute truth. My guesses are that you know nobody or are a hater that the guy mangaged out of the company or some bullshit competitor that the guy sticks it to in the field on a daily basis. If not, prove me wrong.

 

[Anonymous]

How does the guy I interviewed with in PA still have an RM job? You can actually see the stink of despair wafting off of him as he addresses you.

 

[Anonymous]

Their stuff breaks...it is over, own it and move on.

 

[Anonymous]

Their stuff breaks...it is over, own it and move on.

Ok Beavis you still want to keep this bullshit lie alive. Prove to us all that more than 1 Implant had a breakage issue. Huh, what's that? Fucking crickets...................

 

[Anonymous]

I'm sure it was, and will be, just one. I'm sure with less solid core in the middle, the torque forces won't jeopardize the spot with the differential. The engineers over at Zimmer got some 'splainin to do.

The cricket sound you hear is nobody buying into the hype, cost, or design...or buying these fixtures. shhhhhhhhhh.........

 

[Anonymous]

I'm sure it was, and will be, just one. I'm sure with less solid core in the middle, the torque forces won't jeopardize the spot with the differential. The engineers over at Zimmer got some 'splainin to do.

The cricket sound you hear is nobody buying into the hype, cost, or design...or buying these fixtures. shhhhhhhhhh.........

Hey G-Funk, the entire Implant is 1 solid grade 5 Titanium Alloy core from Top to bottom. The TM portion is press fit over the middle and the apical threads are laser welded on the bottom. 1 solid core. You do not even have the fantest idea of how the TM implant is made yet you claim to be the resident expert? Go fuck yourself! Nobody cares what you and all your cronies at 3i and ID think. Scared shitless is my guess.......... Crickets...........

 

[Anonymous]

Hey G-Funk, the entire Implant is 1 solid grade 5 Titanium Alloy core from Top to bottom. The TM portion is press fit over the middle and the apical threads are laser welded on the bottom. 1 solid core. You do not even have the fantest idea of how the TM implant is made yet you claim to be the resident expert? Go fuck yourself! Nobody cares what you and all your cronies at 3i and ID think. Scared shitless is my guess.......... Crickets...........

Scared. Riiiiiiiight. Let me go hide under my bed from an implant that has already had a recall for breaking, an urgent letter to customers of this implant (all 195 out there!!! Slow down-you're taking over too quick!) changing the surgical instructions with this "strong" design with an undersized core.

Let's review how strong it ISN'T: not offered in 8mm length (like Niznick's TSV), not offered in 3.7mm (like Niznick's TSV), AND (I love this one) NEEDS to be splinted in the posterior if it's a 4.1mm TM in play. Who needs to splint a 4.1mm? You can't be serious, Zimmer. All these things coincidental? I think not.

Also, which thread pattern, if any, determines stability? the apical? The porous midsection that chews up the walls as it passes (if it doesn't snap in dense bone)? the useless microthread change of pitch at the coronal? The answer is--who cares? This thing won't matter in a year. Like all the other novelties from companies that don't know how to innovate.

Call Gerry. Zimmer can't pay you with what they will or won't make on TM, it's going to have to be on Gerry's old stuff. You are one of Gerry's kids, like it or not. They should have a telethon for you.

 

[Anonymous]

Scared. Riiiiiiiight. Let me go hide under my bed from an implant that has already had a recall for breaking, an urgent letter to customers of this implant (all 195 out there!!! Slow down-you're taking over too quick!) changing the surgical instructions with this "strong" design with an undersized core.

Let's review how strong it ISN'T: not offered in 8mm length (like Niznick's TSV), not offered in 3.7mm (like Niznick's TSV), AND (I love this one) NEEDS to be splinted in the posterior if it's a 4.1mm TM in play. Who needs to splint a 4.1mm? You can't be serious, Zimmer. All these things coincidental? I think not.

Also, which thread pattern, if any, determines stability? the apical? The porous midsection that chews up the walls as it passes (if it doesn't snap in dense bone)? the useless microthread change of pitch at the coronal? The answer is--who cares? This thing won't matter in a year. Like all the other novelties from companies that don't know how to innovate.

Call Gerry. Zimmer can't pay you with what they will or won't make on TM, it's going to have to be on Gerry's old stuff. You are one of Gerry's kids, like it or not. They should have a telethon for you.

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfres/res.cfm?id=100455
Really want to bash Zimmer you 3i clown. Looks to me like you should keep youre big mouth shut or at least know whats in your closet. Of course, everyone knows about your products success rate (LOL) and we're tired of hearing your uneducated arguments about blah, blah, blah......I know, I know, you have encode. So F'ing what? Wait, I forgot I'm talking to an engineer. I mean you MUST be to have the ability to break down the design elements of the TM with such precision. BTW, great job with all youre research on the product.....it appears you know more than the Zimmer people. Again, great job. Oh - Before I forget, thank you for the lesson on IS. I was extremely confussed on how to achieve IS and which parts of an implant played a part in that. Also, I hadnt thought about how the TM midsectioin "chews up" bone as it passes filling the thing with that bone. That does sound like a bad idea, I mean what good could come from that? Thanks for the clarificatioin as to which sizes are out there. I mean all us 'Gerry's kids" get confused. As a matter of fact, I'm extremely confused why ID is leaving so much money on the table. My ASP is over $300 and they sell the "same thing" for $150???? I guess that make sense to you as well. Oh theres the other dumbass thing you said, who needs to splint a 3.5 platform in the poterior - you do know the Plat is 3.5, right? Everyone you moron! Then again, I do hope youre telling your doctors how dumb this is and that its okay not to splint with your system. I could go on and on but whats the point. Not 3i?? Please let me know. I would love to talk about whoever you work for. Do a little research and get back to me. Cant wait!

 

[Anonymous]

Don't need to do any research, just like you guys over there. ASP over $300? even if that crap is true, it won't be for long. Why would anyone in their right mind pay more for Niznick's implant, when they can get, you guessed it, Niznick's implant???? What a joke...

Let's see if the TM takes you from #5 to any where else but down. Prediction: ID will pass Zimmer in market share before Zimmer passes 3i. The TM will soon be in the national 'Odd Designs that Didn't Work out Well' travelling show with the AMC Pacer and Betamax cassette players. We'll all nod as it passes and say, "oh yeah, I remember that thing..."

 

[Anonymous]

Your ASP is 300? Too funny! I guess that is because you only have a 2 customers left and they feel sorry for you. BTW you are not their primary system. gigglegiggle

 

[Anonymous]

The 4.1 body implant has a 3.5 platform, yes. Does everyone have instructions to splint? The answer is no. The point I was making is that there have been many precautions taken simply to not break this implant. So many, that you wonder how strong it is. Limited lengths, limited endosseous diameters, and splinting intructions after a recall for breaking. At least the Nobel people can say when their implant breaks upon insertion, it's a 3.5 and it happens at the tri-lobe. Your 4.1 snaps in half. Wonderful.

 

[Anonymous]

Hey ID folks, Niz is getting sued over that stupid letter he sent you all. Unless you want part in that legal suit then shut the fuck up. It was a lie. He is the grand master of lies. IP address are being tracked.

 

[Anonymous]

Hey ID folks, Niz is getting sued over that stupid letter he sent you all. Unless you want part in that legal suit then shut the fuck up. It was a lie. He is the grand master of lies. IP address are being tracked.

Isn't that invasion of privacy? It's an open forum, correct?

 

[Anonymous]

Isn't that invasion of privacy? It's an open forum, correct?

Wrong. Might want to zip it!

 

[Anonymous]

Don't need to do any research, just like you guys over there. ASP over $300? even if that crap is true, it won't be for long. Why would anyone in their right mind pay more for Niznick's implant, when they can get, you guessed it, Niznick's implant???? What a joke...

Let's see if the TM takes you from #5 to any where else but down. Prediction: ID will pass Zimmer in market share before Zimmer passes 3i. The TM will soon be in the national 'Odd Designs that Didn't Work out Well' travelling show with the AMC Pacer and Betamax cassette players. We'll all nod as it passes and say, "oh yeah, I remember that thing..."

First, please allow me to clarify due to the fact you clowns cant read. The recall was due to a change in the IFU. That means "instruction for use" and is part of the 510K. The FDA has to be notified if anything is modified AFTER 510k approval. 3i has certainly never done that. Please see FDA.org for further info. Actually, you should know since youve done it serveral times with implant you currently call your flagship product. No.....I'm not talking about Encode its not an implant. Trust me, we know. Implants fail or break all the time and you'd know that if it wasnt your 1st day. youve had the highest single failure rate with any implant in histroy period. Ok we've settled that, now lets discuss the pending 3i spin out from Biomet. Perhaps if you had been out in the field telling your doctors how dumb Zimmer was instead of on here, maybe Zimmer wouldnt be within 1 million in total sale behind you. So Yes youre goning to get passed if not sold for underperformance. You seem to be a smart guy so a little advice.......wake up. youre on your way out and all this nonsense is just that. Youve really made no point on here worth the time it took to read it. We got the Gerry thing. We know youre smart (misguided but smart). We know you really know nothing about TM. Really what else have you done. Oh yeah, I have 2 doctors, exactly how old are you?

 

[Anonymous]

The 4.1 body implant has a 3.5 platform, yes. Does everyone have instructions to splint? The answer is no. The point I was making is that there have been many precautions taken simply to not break this implant. So many, that you wonder how strong it is. Limited lengths, limited endosseous diameters, and splinting intructions after a recall for breaking. At least the Nobel people can say when their implant breaks upon insertion, it's a 3.5 and it happens at the tri-lobe. Your 4.1 snaps in half. Wonderful.

It's amazing you have a job. It's the 3.3 screw-vent that will flower if placed in the postieror -also a 3.5 platform. Not one 4.1 has "broken in half" to date. I do see why you'd want people to think that though. Also, it's obvious to the intelligent folks on here that you have no idea the intent of the TM so we'll just let you continue to make a fool out if yourself. Please tell us now why, with all your insight, Zimmer hasnt launched shorter sizes to date.

 

[Anonymous]

I don't know, Sunshine, why don't you tell us why they can't make this thing in narrow diameters and shorter lengths. I already gave you my opinion-the narrow core is weaker than the rest.

As far as the "intent of the TM"? You guys are attempting to innovate something in dental, where you literally never have before, without merit. It doesn't improve on what's already there at a lesser cost, and it comes with more disclaimers for use than flamethrower that turns into a chainsaw. 98-99% success rates--a number of systems in that category. Bone preservation--led by Straumann and Astra. 3-4 week healing times--SLActive surface.
You aren't doing anything new, it's $500, and the design of your implant has risk associated with it that you concede in your instructions you were forced to change by the recall.

The "intent of the TM" from the Ziimmer marketing standpoint is this: you guys are "attempting" to get away from the fact that you are nothing more than a repackager of Dr. Niznick's old designs and surfaces. That's why it's out there. Unfortunately for you, that won't happen because you waited far too long to reinvent yourselves, and you don't know how to do it. You are what they thought you were were--a middling way station for Niznick's inventions.

 

[Anonymous]

First, please allow me to clarify due to the fact you clowns cant read. The recall was due to a change in the IFU. That means "instruction for use" and is part of the 510K. The FDA has to be notified if anything is modified AFTER 510k approval. /QUOTE]

Zimmer rep - if you answer these questions, it would clarify issues:
What was the change in the IFU that was necessitated by the apical fracture?
Does your Screw-Vent have the same precautions during insertion or is it unique to TM?
Does your IFU for Screw-Vent require splinting of implants in the posters rather than being able to function freestanding?
Does the TM surface replacing half of the threaded surface of the Screw-Vent increase or decrease the chance for success with immediate loading?

 

[Anonymous]

First, please allow me to clarify due to the fact you clowns cant read. The recall was due to a change in the IFU. That means "instruction for use" and is part of the 510K. The FDA has to be notified if anything is modified AFTER 510k approval. /QUOTE]

Zimmer rep - if you answer these questions, it would clarify issues:
What was the change in the IFU that was necessitated by the apical fracture?
Does your Screw-Vent have the same precautions during insertion or is it unique to TM?
Does your IFU for Screw-Vent require splinting of implants in the posters rather than being able to function freestanding?
Does the TM surface replacing half of the threaded surface of the Screw-Vent increase or decrease the chance for success with immediate loading?

Ok, here ya go:
1) The change required in the IFU for the 4.1 TM Implant discussed a "very dense bone" protocol. It said follow the regular outlined protocols but in very dense bone go 1 drill further in the Surgical Kit.
2) The Screw-Vent does not come in 4.1 diameters (3.7, 4.7 and 6.0). The Tapered Screw-Vent has the same protocol as the 4.1 TM with the exception of the additional drill recomendation in very dense bone. However, in very dense bone with the regular 4.1 TSV, the Bone Tap is the final "optional" recomendation in the protol.
3) The Screw-Vent or Tapered Screw-Vent are not required to be splinted in the posterior.
4) The TM Implant along with the TSV cary very clear FDA Indications in their IFU's for "Immediate Load". That means you can Immediate Load TM and TSV where determined appropriate by the Surgeon.

*Hope that helps.

 

[Anonymous]

I don't know, Sunshine, why don't you tell us why they can't make this thing in narrow diameters and shorter lengths. I already gave you my opinion-the narrow core is weaker than the rest.

As far as the "intent of the TM"? You guys are attempting to innovate something in dental, where you literally never have before, without merit. It doesn't improve on what's already there at a lesser cost, and it comes with more disclaimers for use than flamethrower that turns into a chainsaw. 98-99% success rates--a number of systems in that category. Bone preservation--led by Straumann and Astra. 3-4 week healing times--SLActive surface.
You aren't doing anything new, it's $500, and the design of your implant has risk associated with it that you concede in your instructions you were forced to change by the recall.

The "intent of the TM" from the Ziimmer marketing standpoint is this: you guys are "attempting" to get away from the fact that you are nothing more than a repackager of Dr. Niznick's old designs and surfaces. That's why it's out there. Unfortunately for you, that won't happen because you waited far too long to reinvent yourselves, and you don't know how to do it. You are what they thought you were were--a middling way station for Niznick's inventions.

WOW where do I start? seems all you have is Niznick and recall. LOL the recall has been very well explained so lets talk about TSV. Niznicks inventions huh. Ok with this continued dumb logic, I guess your a middling way station for Branemarks inventions. Fair enough? Of course not you goof. i dont recall anyone on here ever saying Niznick didnt invent the implant. He invented it, sold it, then copied it and sold it again. I do hope that we all understand that now. Perhaps you could now let that go you Branemark knock off. Your 2 great examples are laughable. A tissue level implant trying to compete in the bone level game - which actually goes against the iti principles does it not? nonetheless, Niznick knock off or was it Branemark they copied? Fact is, Straumann didnt come up with it all by themselves or are you saying they did? confused now. 3 - 4 weeks? they are temporizing in that time and loading in 6 weeks. Still confused. Astra was sold because they were broke. maybe it was because they paid 3x's the value for Atlantis or maybe because they poured every dime they made in the universities to buy business. seems it worked so well Astra dumped them not to mention ive never heard astra say anything about finals in 3 - 4 weeks. maybe im wrong. further more, anyone can have 0 boneloss if we use astra's math. i saw the last study and thats easy to prove by redefining how and where measurements are taken. joke. now dentsply is going to have to show a profit or danaher will dump them too. Oh yeah, both of which have a $400+ implant. not really seeing the whole lower cost aspect of this. what $50 lower? It seems like you are saying these to companies did or are doing something no one else is doing??? not really sure what youre saying and I doubt you do either. As far as doing something without merit, seriously? so that would mean everything done from a bone regeneration standpoint is done with out merit. Again just using your logic. Someone was the first to graft using techniques taken from ortho or are you saying Straumann or Astra started that too. fact is TM has worked so well in ortho that it makes sense to try to use it in dental. i'd say 14 years experience in bone intergration in ortho constitutes "merit" by anyones definition. I get what youre trying to say and its just dumb......unless your company started it all. if not youre bashing a company for incorperating the success theyve had in bone in another area of bone. to me, seems like a logical step to make. now lets see if you can respond without using Niznick or recall. I doubt it but we'll see.