The New Toronto Declaration

13 ideas shaping the next 50 years of implant dentistry

The next 50 years start by rethinking what we know

Fifty years of implantology (partly thanks to the 1982 Toronto Convention) have brought us unprecedented advancements and created a strong scientific and clinical foundation. Reliable osseointegration, predictable treatment methods, advanced implant surfaces, and digital technology have fundamentally changed the way we treat patients.

But progress does not come about simply by doing more.

Progress occurs when we dare to take a fresh look at what we have taken for granted for years. The next fifty years call on us to look beyond the obvious.

During the international symposium in Toronto (June 2026), therefore, the focus was not solely on looking back at the development of implantology. The central question was, above all:

Which beliefs must we reexamine in order to shape implantology for the next fifty years?

The New Toronto Declaration provides thirteen guiding responses to these questions.

Not a list of products.
Not a new, universal treatment protocol.
Not a substitute for clinical expertise.

Rather, it offers thirteen “invitations” to look at bone, stability, biology, tissue preservation, implant design, loading, digital collaboration, and ultimately the criteria by which we assess success in a new light.

The New Toronto Declaration thus brings together thirteen ideas that challenge existing assumptions and propose a new direction: biologically grounded, patient-specific, and fully integrated treatment.

Together, they form a single narrative:

From implant-centered thinking to biologically grounded, patient-specific, and fully integrated treatment.

Our belief: Progress begins with better questions

Implantology has grown by finding answers to complex clinical questions. But over the years, some of those answers have become set rules.

What is the ideal insertion torque?
Does stability always decrease in the first few weeks?
Is under-preparation really the right way to achieve primary stability?
Is bone augmentation always necessary in cases of a narrow alveolar ridge?
Should loading protocols be determined by time, or by the individual patient’s situation?
And is implant survival still a sufficient criterion for success?

The New Toronto Declaration does not pose these questions to reject existing knowledge. It poses them to advance the field.

Because true innovation does not begin with defending what we know.