Skip to content

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

↑ ↓ to navigate · ↵ to open

Osstem TS III vs TS IV

Quick answer

The Roman numeral in the Osstem TS line marks a design variant, not a generation — TS IV is not a newer or better TS III. TS III is the general-purpose tapered fixture; TS IV has a much larger thread pitch and is presented by Osstem for soft bone and the maxillary sinus region.

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

Osstem TS III SA

Osstem Implant Co., Ltd.Manufacturer-reported[1][2]

Osstem TS IV SA

Osstem Implant Co., Ltd.Manufacturer-reported[1][2]

Implant level

Osstem TS III SA

Bone level — the catalogue describes TSIII SA as a submerged-type implantManufacturer-reported[1]

Osstem TS IV SA

Bone level — described as a submerged-type implantManufacturer-reported[1]

Body geometry

Osstem TS III SA

Tapered body design, stated to give initial fixation at placementManufacturer-reported[1]

Osstem TS IV SA

Tapered body, sharing the TS connection with the rest of the lineManufacturer-reported[1]

Material

Osstem TS III SA

Titanium — the instructions for use state that the fixture is made mainly of titaniumManufacturer-reported[1]The instructions for use do not name a titanium grade for the fixture.

Osstem TS IV SA

Titanium — the instructions for use state that the fixture is made mainly of titaniumManufacturer-reported[1]No titanium grade is named in the instructions for use.

Surface

Osstem TS III SA

SA — sandblasted with alumina and acid-etchedManufacturer-reported[2][1]

Osstem TS IV SA

SA — sandblasted with alumina and acid-etchedManufacturer-reported[2][1]

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[1]

Osstem TS IV SA

Internal hex with an 11-degree tapered connectionManufacturer-reported[1]

Platform switching

Osstem TS III SA

Osstem lists platform switching among the features of the TSIII SA fixtureManufacturer-reported[2]

Osstem TS IV SA

Manufacturer documentation not located(Osstem describes platform switching for the TS line generally; we have not located a statement specific to TSIV SA.)

Available diameters

Osstem TS III SA

Ø3.0, 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 5.5, 6.0 and 7.0 mmManufacturer-reported[1]Read from the fixture ordering tables in the TS System catalogue.

Osstem TS IV SA

Ø4.0, 4.5, 5.0, 6.0 and 7.0 mmManufacturer-reported[1]

Available lengths

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[1]Availability varies by diameter; taken from the fixture product codes in the catalogue.

Osstem TS IV SA

7, 8.5, 10, 11.5 and 13 mmManufacturer-reported[1]

Immediate protocol

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[1]

Osstem TS IV SA

Recommended placement torque below 40 NcmManufacturer-reported[1]

Short implant option

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[1]

Osstem TS IV SA

Not publicly verified

The biggest differences

Both are submerged tapered bone-level fixtures on the same internal hex with an 11 degree taper, and both carry the SA sandblasted and acid-etched surface. What separates them is thread pitch. TS III uses a corkscrew thread with smaller threads in the upper part of the body; TS IV uses a much larger pitch specified per diameter — 0.8 mm at 4.0 mm, 1.0 mm at 4.5 mm and 1.2 mm at 5.0 mm — so it advances further with each turn and cuts a coarser path.

Design

That coarse thread has a handling consequence Osstem states directly: because the pitch is large, the placement speed should be reduced to 15 rpm or less. TS IV also has a sharp apex which the catalogue says allows placement in D4 bone after only 2.0 or 3.0 mm drilling. TS III instead has an apex described as giving initial fixation in extraction sites and over the apical 3 mm — a different route to the same objective.

Prosthetic ecosystem

The connection is identical across the TS line, so prosthetic components are common between TS II, TS III and TS IV. That is a genuine practical advantage: a laboratory restoring an Osstem TS case needs the platform size rather than the exact fixture variant. Note that TS III uses a mini connection on 3.0 and 3.5 mm fixtures and a regular connection from 4.0 mm upwards, and TS IV starts at 4.0 mm, so TS IV is a regular-connection implant throughout.

What may influence clinical selection

TS IV exists for poorly mineralised bone, most often the posterior maxilla, where a fine thread struggles to find grip. TS III covers the general case and reaches both narrower and wider — 3.0 to 7.0 mm against TS IV's 4.0 to 7.0 mm — and offers 4 mm and 5 mm ultra-short fixtures at 5.0 mm diameter that TS IV does not. Osstem recommends 4.5 mm or wider for single posterior restorations in both.

Important limitations

Reading a treatment plan that says only 'Osstem TS' tells you very little. The letters after the number matter too: SA is the plain sandblasted and acid-etched surface, while CA is the same physical surface stored in solution to keep it chemically active. Ask for the full designation, the diameter and the length, and keep them.

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.

Osstem TS III SA

via Osstem

5

FDA 510(k) clearances

2016 – 2023

Filed by Osstem Implant Co., Ltd.

Osstem TS IV 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