Biomechanical analysis of the stresses generated by different disocclusion patterns in an implant-supported mandibular complete denture

Abstract

Objectives:This study evaluated by three-dimensional finite element analysis the tensions generated by different disocclusion patterns (canine guide and bilateral balanced occlusion) in an implant-supported mandibular complete denture.Material and Methods:A three-dimensional model of implant-supported mandibular complete denture was fabricated according to the Brånemark protocol. A 5-element 3.75 x 13-mm screw-shape dental implant system was modeled for this study. The implants were located in the intermental foramen region with 3-mm-high prosthetic components joined by a nickel-chromium framework with 12-mm bilateral cantilever covered by acrylic resin and 12 acrylic denture teeth. SolidWorks® software was used before and after processing the simulations. The mechanical properties of the components were inserted in the model and a 15 N load was established in fixed points, in each one of the simulations. Data were collected in the entire nickel-chromium framework. The results were displayed three-dimensionally as color graphic scales.Results:The canine guide generated greater tensions in the region of the first implant, while the bilateral balanced occlusion generated great tensions in the entire metallic framework. The maximum tension found in the simulation of the bilateral balanced occlusion was 3.22 fold higher than the one found in the simulation of the disocclusion in canine guide.Conclusion:The pattern of disocclusion in canine guide is the ideal for implant-supported mandibular complete denture.

Correlation between vertical misfits and stresses transmitted to implants from metal frameworks

“…The load transmission to the implants, prosthesis and bone depends on several factors as the number and location of the implants (Karl et al, 2007;Ogawa et al, 2010;Sagat et al, 2010), inclination of the implants (Bevilacqua et al, 2011;Markarian et al, 2007), cantilever length (Bevilacqua et al, 2011), stiffness of the metal framework (Abreu et al, 2010), prosthesis marginal fit (Carr et al, 1996;Markarian et al, 2007;Winter et al, 2010), prosthesis material (Ogawa et al, 2010), extension of the prosthesis base and attachment systems (Sadowsky and Caputo, 2000) and occlusion pattern (Greco et al, 2009).…”

Finite Element Analysis of the Influence of Implant Inclination on Stress Distribution in Mandibular Overdentures

“…All materials were assumed linear, elastic, and isotropic; their properties were taken from the literature (Table 1). 22,[27][28][29][30] Stress analysis was performed using the FE software ABAQUS v6.9 (ABAQUS Inc, Providence, RI). In all situations (Model 1 and Model 2), an arbitrary 15-pound vertical and unilateral load representing the masticatory force was applied to the distal occlusal fossa of the first premolar of the prosthesis.…”

Clinical aspects in the treatment planning for rehabilitation with overdenture and protocol-type prosthesis

“…After the introduction of this concept, this author started replacing the root of missing teeth in the lower arch in edentulous patients by securing a fixed full denture using screws. This type of prosthesis is known as Branemark protocol-type prosthesis 3 .…”

“…The original technique has undergone some changes over time, and today there are a variety of prosthetic treatment options associated with dental implants for the total replacement of missing teeth in the mandible and maxilla [2][3][4] . Among them are the overdentures, which are total screw-retained implant-supported prostheses [5][6][7] .…”

“…Since prosthetic rehabilitation offers a wide range of therapeutic possibilities, these types of prostheses have become a challenge to dental surgeons 4,6,8,[12][13] . Conventional total prostheses are mucosa-supported prostheses, but overdentures, for example, can be implant-retained combining the implant retention with the mucosa support, or they can be implant-supported, with the same biomechanical characteristics of implant-fixed prostheses with little to no mucosal support [2][3][4]12 .…”