| 71JUNG et al.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to use finite element analysis to investigate the effect of misfit prostheses, cantilever prostheses, and various occlusal forces on the stress distribution in the prostheses, implant components, and surrounding bone.Materials and Methods: Two 3-dimensional finite element models were constructed: (1) a 2-implant-supported, 2-unit fixed partial denture and (2) a 2-implant-supported, 2-unit fixed partial denture with a distal cantilever. Variations of the standard finite element models were made by placing a 111-m gap between the gold cylinder on either the mesial or distal implant. The effects of load of 100 N were tested on all models. Subsequently, loads of 50 N, 200 N, and 300 N were evaluated on the cantilever model.Results: When the gap was positioned near to the applied force, the stress in both models increased significantly in the implant components and surrounding bone. The stress increase in each component ranged from 8% to 64% in the non-cantilever models and 43% to 85% in the cantilever models. The greatest stress was found in the distal gold screw. The effect of the gap was clearly shown by the pattern of stress distribution in both models. Additionally, the presence of a cantilever and excessive occlusal force amplified the effect of prosthesis misfit.Conclusions: Prosthesis misfit influenced the pattern and magnitude of stress distribution in the prosthesis, implant components, and surrounding bone, and the presence of the cantilever or greater occlusal force amplified the effect of misfit.

Objective: To compare static computer-aided implant surgery (s-CAIS) and conventional implant surgery (CIS) for single-tooth replacement in posterior sites in terms of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).Methods: Forty patients were divided into two groups for treatment with s-CAIS (Test) and CIS (Control). Patients' anxiety level was measured using the modified dental anxiety score before implant surgery. After surgery, patients completed two questionnaires for 7 days. The first questionnaire assessed pain level using a visual analog scale (VAS) and the incident rate of pain using a 5-point Likert scale; analgesic intake was also recorded. The second questionnaire investigated patients' oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) including postoperative symptoms, oral function, and daily activity. The difference between data was compared at significance level (α = 0.05).Results: There was no statistically significant difference in pretreatment dental anxiety level, postoperative pain scores, and OHRQoL between treatment groups.Overall, mild or moderate dental anxiety was reported by 70% and 20% of patients, respectively. Pain score was significantly reduced by postoperative Day 3 in the test group and Day 4 in the control group, compared with baseline. Both groups significant reduced analgesic intake by postoperative Day 5. Most OHRQoL-related complaints subsided approximately 3 days after surgery. Conclusions:Overall, PROMs between s-CAIS and CIS were not significantly different for the single-tooth implant surgery in the posterior area. Postoperative symptoms after implant surgery still inevitably occurred, reflecting the normal process of oral wound healing.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose Placement of one-piece ceramic dental implants requires precision, which can be enhanced by using a computer-guided system. This prospective clinical study examines the accuracy of partially guided implantation in the placement of one-piece ceramic implants in the anterior region. Materials and methods One-piece ceramic dental implants were placed in 20 patients who were missing a central or lateral incisor. Partially guided dental implant placements were performed in all cases. The deviations in the implant positions were analyzed by superimposing post-operative cone beam computed tomography images over pre-operative treatment planning images. The results were reported as deviations (mean ± standard deviation) for three aspects (3D offset, mesio-distal, labio-lingual, and apico-coronal) and in three dimensions (the angle, coronal, and apical parts). Results Implants were successfully placed in 20 patients. The mean angular deviation was 4.23±1.84°, whereas the mean coronal 3D offset was 0.98±0.48 mm, and the mean apical 3D offset was 1.57±0.46 mm. Conclusions A prospective clinical study involving 20 patients was conducted to measure the accuracy of computer-guided implantation of one-piece ceramic dental implants. Accuracy was determined by comparing the planned implant position to the actual position. Greater accuracy can be expected at the coronal part than at the apical part. The coronal 3D offset was found to be the most accurate.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to use finite element analysis to investigate the effect of misfit prostheses, cantilever prostheses, and various occlusal forces on the stress distribution in the prostheses, implant components, and surrounding bone.Materials and Methods: Two 3-dimensional finite element models were constructed: (1) a 2-implant-supported, 2-unit fixed partial denture and (2) a 2-implant-supported, 2-unit fixed partial denture with a distal cantilever. Variations of the standard finite element models were made by placing a 111-m gap between the gold cylinder on either the mesial or distal implant. The effects of load of 100 N were tested on all models. Subsequently, loads of 50 N, 200 N, and 300 N were evaluated on the cantilever model.Results: When the gap was positioned near to the applied force, the stress in both models increased significantly in the implant components and surrounding bone. The stress increase in each component ranged from 8% to 64% in the non-cantilever models and 43% to 85% in the cantilever models. The greatest stress was found in the distal gold screw. The effect of the gap was clearly shown by the pattern of stress distribution in both models. Additionally, the presence of a cantilever and excessive occlusal force amplified the effect of prosthesis misfit.Conclusions: Prosthesis misfit influenced the pattern and magnitude of stress distribution in the prosthesis, implant components, and surrounding bone, and the presence of the cantilever or greater occlusal force amplified the effect of misfit.