Neodent 109.218Recalls & reported problems
JJGC Indústria e Comércio de Materiais Dentários S/A. · ALVIM IMPLANT WITH MOUNT · Class 2 · Implant
Data updated Oct 18, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy
- Adverse event reports
- 8
- Deaths reported
- 0
- Injuries reported
- 8
- Recalls naming it
- 0
Summary
The FDA's MAUDE database contains 8 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 07898237566818), received between Nov 9, 2017 and Oct 22, 2020 — classified as 8 injuries.
The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Failure to Osseointegrate” (6 reports).
Reports come from manufacturers, hospitals and patients and are not verified by the FDA. A report does not prove the device caused the event, and counts can't be used to compare devices or estimate failure rates. What reports can and can't tell you · How this data works · Data updated Oct 18, 2026.
Most reported problems
Device problems
- Failure to Osseointegrate6
- Loss of Osseointegration2
Patient problems
- Tissue Damage7
- Pain2
- Failure of Implant1
- Swelling/ Edema1
Recent adverse event reports
The 8 most recent of 8 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.
InjuryOct 22, 2020Loss of Osseointegration; Loss of Osseointegration
THE CLINICIAN REPORTS THE IMPLANT WAS INSERTED (B)(6) 2014 IN THE PATIENT'S MOUTH. DETAILS OF SURGERY: IMMEDIATE EXTRACTION SITE. ON (B)(6) 2020, LOSS OF OSSEOINTEGRATION WAS VERIFIED. PATIENT PRESENTED WITH POOR ORAL HYGIENE. THE DEVICE WAS FORWARDED TO THE MANUFACTURER. AT THE EVENT THE PATIENT EXPERIENCED: SWELLING. NO FURTHER PATIENT COMPLICATIONS WERE REPORTED.
Patient problems: Failure of Implant; Swelling/ Edema
MAUDE report 10720450 ↗InjuryAug 10, 2020Failure to Osseointegrate; Failure to Osseointegrate
THE CLINICIAN REPORTS THE IMPLANT WAS INSERTED (B)(6) 2009 IN THE PATIENT'S MOUTH. ON (B)(6) 2009, NON-OSSEOINTEGRATION WAS VERIFIED. THE DEVICE WAS FORWARDED TO THE MANUFACTURER. THERE WERE NO REPORTED PATIENT INJURIES OR COMPLICATIONS.
Patient problems: Tissue Damage
MAUDE report 10386953 ↗InjuryJun 5, 2020Failure to Osseointegrate; Failure to Osseointegrate
THE CLINICIAN REPORTS THE IMPLANT WAS INSERTED (B)(6) 2019 IN ADA 5. ON (B)(6) 2020, NON-OSSEOINTEGRATION WAS VERIFIED. THE DEVICE WAS FORWARDED TO THE MANUFACTURER. THERE WERE NO REPORTED PATIENT INJURIES OR COMPLICATIONS.
Patient problems: Tissue Damage
MAUDE report 10124425 ↗InjuryFeb 11, 2020Failure to Osseointegrate; Failure to Osseointegrate
(B)(4) ¿ THE DENTIST REPORTED THAT 21 DAYS THE DENTAL IMPLANT WAS INSTALLED IN PATIENT¿S MOUTH, ITS NON-OSSEOINTEGRATION WAS OBSERVED. MOREOVER, 15N.CM OF PRIMARY STABILITY WAS ACHIEVED, THE PATIENT PRESENTED INSUFFICIENT BONE QUALITY/QUANTITY (BONE TYPE III), IMMEDIATE LOAD PROCEDURE WAS DONE AND IMMEDIATE IMPLANT WAS PERFORMED.
Patient problems: Pain; Tissue Damage
MAUDE report 9695580 ↗InjuryNov 14, 2017Loss of Osseointegration; Loss of Osseointegration
(B)(4) - THE DENTIST REPORTED THAT, 3 YEARS AFTER THE DENTAL IMPLANT WAS INSTALLED IN PATIENT¿S MOUTH, ITS LOSS OF OSSEOINTEGRATION WAS OBSERVED. A 50 NCM OF PRIMARY STABILITY WAS ACHIEVED AND THE PATIENT PRESENTED INSUFFICIENT BONE QUALITY/ QUANTITY.
Patient problems: Tissue Damage
MAUDE report 7029545 ↗InjuryNov 10, 2017Failure to Osseointegrate; Failure to Osseointegrate
(B)(4) - THE DENTIST REPORTED THAT 18 DAYS AFTER THE DENTAL IMPLANT WAS INSTALLED IN INTRAORAL REGION #11 IT WAS VERIFIED ITS NON- OSSEOINTEGRATION. A 30 NCM OF PRIMARY STABILITY WAS ACHIEVED AND IMMEDIATE LOAD WAS PERFORMED. NO FURTHER INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED.
Patient problems: Tissue Damage
MAUDE report 7017399 ↗InjuryNov 10, 2017Failure to Osseointegrate; Failure to Osseointegrate
(B)(4). THE DENTIST REPORTED THAT ALMOST 2 MONTHS AFTER THE DENTAL IMPLANT WAS INSTALLED IN INTRAORAL REGION #5, IT WAS VERIFIED ITS NON- OSSEOINTEGRATION. 32 NCM OF PRIMARY STABILITY WAS ACHIEVED AND IMMEDIATE LOAD WAS NOT PERFORMED. THE PATIENT PRESENTED BONE TYPE III AND FENESTRATION OCCURRED DURING SURGERY.
Patient problems: Pain; Tissue Damage
MAUDE report 7016989 ↗InjuryNov 9, 2017Failure to Osseointegrate; Failure to Osseointegrate
(B)(4). THE DENTIST REPORTED THAT 6 MONTHS AFTER THREE DENTAL IMPLANTS WERE INSTALLED IN PATIENT'S MAXILE IT WAS VERIFIED THEIR NON- OSSEOINTEGRATION. FIFTEEN (15) NCM OF PRIMARY STABILITY WAS ACHIEVED AND IMMEDIATE LOAD WAS NOT EXECUTED. THE PATIENT PRESENTED BONE TYPE IV.
Patient problems: Tissue Damage
MAUDE report 7015391 ↗
Other IMPLANT, ENDOSSEOUS, ROOT-FORM devices
- Straumann® Dental Implant System Roxolid® SLA Impl. SLA Roxolid BLInstitut Straumann AG · IMPLANT, ENDOSSEOUS, ROOT-FORM43,616 reports
- STRAUMANN BONE LEVEL TAPERED IMPLANT SLActive Roxolid BLInstitut Straumann AG · IMPLANT, ENDOSSEOUS, ROOT-FORM40,404 reports
- Straumann® Dental Implant System Roxolid® SLA Impl. SLA Roxolid BLInstitut Straumann AG · IMPLANT, ENDOSSEOUS, ROOT-FORM27,400 reports
- STRAUMANN BONE LEVEL TAPERED IMPLANT SLActive Roxolid BLInstitut Straumann AG · IMPLANT, ENDOSSEOUS, ROOT-FORM25,621 reports
- STRAUMANN BONE LEVEL TAPERED IMPLANT SLA Titanium BLInstitut Straumann AG · IMPLANT, ENDOSSEOUS, ROOT-FORM25,298 reports
- Straumann® Dental Implant System Roxolid® SLA Impl. SLA Roxolid BLInstitut Straumann AG · IMPLANT, ENDOSSEOUS, ROOT-FORM23,448 reports
- STRAUMANN BONE LEVEL TAPERED IMPLANT SLActive Roxolid BLInstitut Straumann AG · IMPLANT, ENDOSSEOUS, ROOT-FORM22,320 reports
- STRAUMANN BONE LEVEL TAPERED IMPLANT SLActive Roxolid BLInstitut Straumann AG · IMPLANT, ENDOSSEOUS, ROOT-FORM22,267 reports
Sources and updates
- Device record: FDA GUDID, file dated Oct 13, 2026 · View this device in AccessGUDID ↗
- Adverse event reports: FDA MAUDE, file dated Oct 14, 2026 · each report above links to its original FDA record
- Recalls: FDA Medical Device Recalls, file dated Oct 16, 2026
- Page last rebuilt: Oct 18, 2026. Data downloaded through openFDA, which notes it is not validated for clinical or regulatory use.
How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page