CERALOG Hexalobe
This is the reason Camlog appears on this site. A two-piece ceramic implant, metal-free, with a crown that can be unscrewed rather than cemented permanently, is a genuinely difficult thing to engineer, and very few manufacturers offer one.
At a glance
- Implant material
- Zirconium dioxide, ivory coloured
- Design
- Two-piece, screw-retained abutment
- Connection
- Hexalobe
- Abutment material
- PEKK, a high-performance polymer
- Surface
- Dual, less rough at the neck, rougher along the buried portion
- Manufacturing
- Ceramic Injection Molding (CIM)
Why two-piece ceramic is hard
Zirconia is hard and brittle. Cutting a fine screw thread into it, as every titanium implant does, creates a stress concentration where the ceramic can crack. The industry's usual workaround is to make ceramic implants as one solid piece, which solves the strength problem and creates a clinical one: the post angle is fixed at surgery, and the crown must be cemented on permanently.
Camlog's answer is the connection geometry. The company states the Hexalobe connection introduces insertion forces tangentially into the implant, allowing considerably higher torque to be transferred than a hexagonal connection could manage. Spreading the load around the circumference rather than concentrating it on six flats is what makes a reliable screw joint in ceramic possible.
The PEKK abutment
CERALOG abutments are made from PEKK, a high-performance polymer. Camlog describes PEKK as ductile, which damps the transmission of chewing forces to the implant and reduces stress concentration. In a brittle ceramic system, putting a slightly yielding component between the crown and the implant is a coherent engineering choice rather than a cost saving.
The dual surface
Camlog states CERALOG implants carry a dual surface: less rough in the neck area for better soft-tissue adhesion, and optimised for osseointegration along the buried portion. This is possible because Ceramic Injection Molding forms the implant in a mould rather than machining it.
The logic is sound. Bone wants roughness to grip; gum tissue seals better against a smoother surface, and a rough surface exposed above the bone collects plaque. Different jobs at different depths, so different surfaces.
The honest position
Camlog's literature dates the research to 2006 at AXIS biodental, with clinical studies from 2007 and the two-piece Hexalobe in its present configuration since early 2012. Titanium has been followed in patients since 1965. That gap is real and cannot be argued away, ceramic implants are a well-reasoned newer technology, not a proven equivalent.
It is also worth being honest about why you want ceramic. A thin gum at a visible front tooth, where a grey shadow could show, is a sound aesthetic reason. Believing titanium is harmful is a different matter, genuine titanium allergy is rare, and that belief deserves a proper conversation and testing rather than an assumption. Our implant materials page covers this properly.
Questions worth asking your dentist
- Am I a candidate for the two-piece Hexalobe rather than the one-piece Monobloc?
- What is my actual reason for choosing ceramic, aesthetics or metal avoidance?
- If metal avoidance, have I been tested for titanium sensitivity?
- What is the cost difference against a titanium implant?
- How many ceramic implants have you placed, and what has your experience been?
- How readily can you obtain CERALOG components in Canada?
Related systems
CERALOG Monobloc
The one-piece ceramic option, restored with a cemented crown.
CONELOG
Camlog's conical-connection titanium platform.
References
- Camlog. CERALOG Implant System Product Catalog, valid from January 2021.
- Camlog. CONELOG Product Catalogue. Document J8001-0009 Rev 11.
Specifications compiled from Camlog's publicly available product literature and Canadian product pages. Manufacturer performance claims are identified as such. DentalImplantInfo.ca is not affiliated with, endorsed by or sponsored by Camlog. Camlog, CONELOG, CERALOG, DEDICAM, Promote, SCREW-LINE, PROGRESSIVE-LINE and BioHPP are trademarks of their respective owners, used here for identification and educational purposes.