Skip to content

Start typing to search 200+ implant systems, brands, manufacturers and technologies.

↑ ↓ to navigate · ↵ to open

Hiossen ET III vs Osstem TS III

Quick answer

These are not rival companies. Hiossen states on its own site that it was established by Osstem in Pennsylvania in 2006 and describes Osstem as its parent, so comparing ET III with TS III is comparing two products from related organisations rather than two independent designs. They are still different implants, and their connections are not interchangeable.

Side by side

Rows appear only where at least one side has data. Where a value is not verified we say so rather than leaving it blank.

Manufacturer

Hiossen ET III SA

Hiossen, Inc. — Hiossen states it was established by its parent company Osstem in 2006 in Pennsylvania and became Hiossen Implant in 2007Manufacturer-reported[1]Hiossen describes Osstem as its parent company on its own corporate page; the two are related companies, not independent competitors.

Osstem TS III SA

Osstem Implant Co., Ltd.Manufacturer-reported[6][7]

Implant level

Hiossen ET III SA

Bone levelVerified spec[2]In its own 510(k) K153332, Hiossen sets out a substantial-equivalence matrix whose primary predicate is the HIOSSEN Implant System (K140934) — the clearance that covers the tapered ETIII SA fixture in body diameters 3.5 to 6.8 mm — and lists that device's structure as 'Internal Hex / Bone Level Implant / Tapered body shape / 3 sided cutting edge with self-tapping'. Confidence is held at medium because the wording appears in the predicate column of a comparison table rather than in a description of the ET III SA fixture itself; K140934 characterises the same fixture only as a 'Submerged Fixture', and the Hiossen ET III SA catalogue does not use bone-level or tissue-level vocabulary.

Osstem TS III SA

Bone level — the catalogue describes TSIII SA as a submerged-type implantManufacturer-reported[6]

Body geometry

Hiossen ET III SA

Tapered body; Hiossen states a 1.5-degree taper for ET IIIManufacturer-reported[3]

Osstem TS III SA

Tapered body design, stated to give initial fixation at placementManufacturer-reported[6]

Material

Hiossen ET III SA

Commercially pure titanium, grade 4, to ASTM F67Verified spec[5]Hiossen's 510(k) K140934 gives the material of the ETIII SA Fixture as 'Pure Titanium (ASTM F 67)' in the device description and as 'Pure Titanium Grade 4 (ASTM F67)' in the substantial-equivalence matrix. This applies to the ET III SA range recorded here. The separate Ø3.2 mm ETIII SA fixture cleared later under K153332 is a different substrate — titanium alloy Ti-6Al-4V to ASTM F136 — and is not part of the Ø3.5 to 5.0 range on this page.

Osstem TS III SA

Titanium — the instructions for use state that the fixture is made mainly of titaniumManufacturer-reported[6]The instructions for use do not name a titanium grade for the fixture.

Surface

Hiossen ET III SA

SA — sandblasted with alumina and acid-etched, described as a combination of crater and micro-pit morphologyManufacturer-reported[4]

Osstem TS III SA

SA — sandblasted with alumina and acid-etchedManufacturer-reported[7][6]

Connection

Hiossen ET III SA

Two connection sizes: a Mini connection on the Ø3.5 fixture and a Standard connection shared by Ø4.0, Ø4.5 and Ø5.0, with a single abutment range across the standard sizesManufacturer-reported[4]The catalogue does not state a taper angle for the connection.

Osstem TS III SA

Internal hex with an 11-degree tapered connection; a mini connection is used on Ø3.0 and Ø3.5 fixtures and a regular connection on Ø4.0 and aboveManufacturer-reported[6]

Platform switching

Hiossen ET III SA

Manufacturer documentation not located

Osstem TS III SA

Osstem lists platform switching among the features of the TSIII SA fixtureManufacturer-reported[7]

Available diameters

Hiossen ET III SA

Ø3.5, 4.0, 4.5 and 5.0 mmManufacturer-reported[4]

Osstem TS III SA

Ø3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5.5, 6.0 and 7.0 mmManufacturer-reported[6]Read from the fixture ordering tables in the TS System catalogue.

Available lengths

Hiossen ET III SA

Ø3.5 in 8.5, 10, 11.5, 13 and 15 mm; Ø4.0, Ø4.5 and Ø5.0 in 7, 8.5, 10, 11.5, 13 and 15 mmManufacturer-reported[4]

Osstem TS III SA

6, 7, 8.5, 10, 11.5 and 13 mm at Ø4.0 and above; Ø3.0 and Ø3.5 from 8.5 to 13 mm; Ø5.0 additionally in 4 mm and 5 mmManufacturer-reported[6]Availability varies by diameter; taken from the fixture product codes in the catalogue.

Immediate protocol

Hiossen ET III SA

Not publicly verified

Osstem TS III SA

Recommended placement torque below 40 Ncm; the catalogue states the fixture acquires initial fixation for immediate loading in soft boneManufacturer-reported[6]

Short implant option

Hiossen ET III SA

Not publicly verified

Osstem TS III SA

Extra-short options are offered; the instructions for use restrict implants shorter than 7 mm with a diameter of 5 mm or more to the molar region and advise splinting and a longer healing periodManufacturer-reported[6]

The biggest differences

Both are tapered two-piece fixtures finished with an SA sandblasted and acid-etched surface, and both organise their connections into a narrow and a standard size. ET III is offered at 3.5, 4.0, 4.5 and 5.0 mm with a Mini connection on the 3.5 mm fixture and a Standard connection shared by the rest. TS III runs wider, from 3.0 to 7.0 mm, with a mini connection at 3.0 and 3.5 mm and a regular connection from 4.0 mm upwards. Hiossen states a 1.5 degree taper for ET III; Osstem describes TS III's taper qualitatively rather than numerically.

Prosthetic ecosystem

The shared corporate parent does not make the components interchangeable, and this is the point most comparison articles get wrong in the other direction — assuming that because the companies are related, the parts must fit. They should be treated as separate prosthetic systems. Where it does matter is supply: an implant from either is backed by the same manufacturing organisation, which is a reasonable signal about long-term parts availability.

Geographic availability and serviceability

The distinction between the two is largely regulatory and commercial. Implants sold as Hiossen are cleared and supported through the United States organisation, which affects what a US clinician can readily obtain. A UK patient treated in Turkey or Korea is far more likely to receive an Osstem-branded TS implant, and a UK patient with an ET III has usually been treated in the United States. For future maintenance, record which name appears on the implant passport.

What may influence clinical selection

There is no meaningful sense in which a patient chooses between these two — the choice is made by where the treatment happens and which organisation supplies the practice. What is worth doing is resisting comparison content that ranks Hiossen against Osstem as though they were competitors, because the premise of that comparison is wrong.

Important limitations

Our Hiossen record is held as database-only: we could not find a primary Hiossen document naming the alloy or grade, and the implant level is not stated on the pages we reviewed. The table below therefore has blanks on the Hiossen side that are absent on the Osstem side.

So which is better?

Neither is universally better, and any page telling you otherwise is selling something. These are different designs with different trade-offs, and the right choice depends on the bone available, the position in the mouth, the planned restoration, and what the treating clinician is equipped and experienced to place and to service years from now. That last point is easy to overlook and matters more than most specification differences: components need to remain obtainable for as long as the implant is in place.

Regulatory record

US FDA 510(k) clearances held by each side, retrieved from the FDA's own database. Clearances are held at brand level, so every system from the same brand shares this record.

Hiossen ET III SA

via Hiossen

3

FDA 510(k) clearances

2014 – 2025

Filed by Hiossen, Inc.

Osstem TS III SA

via Osstem

5

FDA 510(k) clearances

2016 – 2023

Filed by Osstem Implant Co., Ltd.

A clearance count is not a quality ranking, and the larger number is not the better implant. A brand with more clearances usually has a longer history or a broader component range. FDA "clearance" also is not FDA "approval" — it means the device was accepted as substantially equivalent to one already on the market, generally without a clinical trial. A blank here means we could not match a filing with confidence, not that the brand lacks authorisation. What these actually mean →

Sources

Numbers match the citations beside each claim above.

Primary sources

Before you continue

Get a free implant assessment

You are about to start a WhatsApp conversation with Taki Dent, Dental Implants Guide’s disclosed clinical partner in Antalya, Turkey.

Taki Dent is Dental Implants Guide’s disclosed clinical partner in Antalya, Turkey. We may receive a commercial benefit when patients choose treatment with Taki Dent through this website. Your message and phone number are shared with Taki Dent so that they can reply to you. This is a preliminary assessment with no obligation — it is not a diagnosis, and individual suitability always depends on clinical examination. See our privacy policy.

Continue to WhatsApp Learn about Taki Dent