Skip to content

Neodent 109.806Recalls & reported problems

JJGC Indústria e Comércio de Materiais Dentários S/A. · TITAMAX SMART IMPLANT · Class 2 · Implant

Data updated Oct 18, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy

Adverse event reports
4
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
4
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 4 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 07899878000150), received between Nov 9, 2017 and Apr 23, 2020 — classified as 4 injuries.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Failure to Osseointegrate” (3 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 Osseointegrate3
  • Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem1

Patient problems

  • Tissue Damage4
  • Unspecified Infection1

Recent adverse event reports

The 4 most recent of 4 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • InjuryApr 23, 2020Failure to Osseointegrate; Failure to Osseointegrate

    (B)(4)¿ THE DENTIST REPORTED THAT 2 MONTHS AND 9 DAYS AFTER THE DENTAL IMPLANT WAS INSTALLED IN INTRAORAL REGION 11#, ITS NON- OSSEOINTEGRATION WAS OBSERVED. MOREOVER, THE PATIENT PRESENTED INSUFFICIENT BONE QUALITY/QUANTITY (BONE TYPE II).

    Patient problems: Tissue Damage

    MAUDE report 9990545 ↗
  • InjuryAug 15, 2019Failure to Osseointegrate; Failure to Osseointegrate

    1000402150: THE DENTIST REPORTED THAT AFTER THE DENTAL IMPLANT WAS INSTALLED IN PATIENT¿S MOUTH, ITS NON- OSSEOINTEGRATION WAS OBSERVED. THE PATIENT PRESENTED BONE TYPE II.

    Patient problems: Tissue Damage

    MAUDE report 8897941 ↗
  • InjuryNov 10, 2017Failure to Osseointegrate; Failure to Osseointegrate

    RP.005547 - THE DENTIST REPORTED THAT, 20 DAYS AFTER THE DENTAL IMPLANT WAS INSTALLED IN INTRAORAL REGION #9, ITS NON-OSSEOINTEGRATION WAS OBSERVED. THE IMPLANT WAS INSTALLED WITHOUT IMMEDIATELY LOAD. THE PATIENT PRESENTED BONE TYPE II AND BONE GRAFT WAS EXECUTED.

    Patient problems: Tissue Damage; Unspecified Infection

    MAUDE report 7021456 ↗
  • InjuryNov 9, 2017Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

    (B)(4) - THE DENTIST REPORTED THAT HE DECIDED TO REMOVE THE DENTAL IMPLANT AT THE INSTALLATION SURGERY, BECAUSE IT WAS DRILLED A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THE DESIRED. THE IMPLANT WAS NOT REPLACED AT THE SAME SURGERY.

    Patient problems: Tissue Damage

    MAUDE report 7012926 ↗

Other IMPLANT, ENDOSSEOUS, ROOT-FORM devices

All IMPLANT, ENDOSSEOUS, ROOT-FORM devices →

Sources and updates

How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page