A Finite Element Analysis of Stress Distribution in Bone Tissue Surrounding Uncoupled or Splinted Dental Implants

Bergkvist, Göran; Simonsson, Kjell; Rydberg, Kristofer; Johansson, Fredrik; Dérand, Tore

doi:10.1111/j.1708-8208.2007.00059.x

Cited by 79 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The notation that stands out, however, is how the D dental implant characterized by the presence of the micro-threaded neck has a significantly different behaviour if compared with the other model (15)(16)(17)(18)(19). Even its geometry and shape should ensure the primary stability (which is impossible for the high values of the cortical bone), the study results underline how the fixture and the abutment of this model have values of the average Von Mises voltage significantly above the fatigue limit of the material.…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

FEM and VonMises analyses of different dental implant shapes for masticatory loading distribution

Cicciù

Bramanti

Cecchetti

et al. 2014

ORL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYThe rehabilitation of edentulous patients is today a challenge for the clinicians. The healthy of the hard and soft issue may be considered a fundamental element for having long-term results. The dental implant progresses about the predictable and safe results made this technique chosen from a large group of practitioners. However some problems related intraoperative and postoperative conditions may create discomfort on the patients and consequently to the clinician. The unfavourable results are often related to the bone tissue quality but sometime the dental implant shape and the prosthesis framework may undergo to technical difficulties. The purpose of this work is, through the use of appropriate FEM models, to analyse the effect of all these parameters in the construction of a prosthesis type "Toronto", evaluating all the surgical and prosthetic components in order to direct the choices made by the surgeon and to optimize the distribution of loads reducing the patient's discomfort and having a long term clinical success.

show abstract

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

FEM and VonMises analyses of different dental implant shapes for masticatory loading distribution

Cicciù

Bramanti

Cecchetti

et al. 2014

ORL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…La solidarisation des implants a été recommandée pour permettre une meilleure répartition des forces et une diminution du stress subi par l'os, donc la cratérisation [3,19,20]. Lorsque des forces angulées sont appliquées, l'étude de Bergkvist et al (2008) [21] Tableau IV. Perte osseuse péri-implantaire en cas de solidarisation (S) versus non-solidarisation (NS) côté mésial.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Impact de la solidarisation des couronnes implanto-portées sur le remodelage osseux péri-implantaire : étude clinique prospective avec suivi à 5 ans

Fortin

París

Thoret

et al. 2016

Med Buccale Chir Buccale

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Résumé -Introduction : L'étude présentée cherchait à mettre en évidence un éventuel lien entre la solidarisation des couronnes et la cratérisation osseuse autour de ces implants. Méthodes : il s'agissait d'une étude prospective sur les implants courts pour le traitement des édentements postérieurs libres mandibulaires. Le traitement correspondait à la mise en place de prothèses scellées sur des implants. Le nombre d'implants posés était identique au nombre de dents à remplacer. La perte osseuse autour des implants était mesurée radiologiquement lors de la mise en place chirurgicale puis tous les ans jusqu'à la cinquième année. La comparaison de la perte osseuse moyenne autour des implants solidarisés versus implants non solidarisés était faite au moyen d'un test t de comparaison de deux moyennes avec des variances égales en prenant l'hypothèse qu'il n'y a pas de différence entre les couronnes solidarisées ou non. Résultats : À 5 ans, les données de 89 implants ont été évaluées. 100 % des implants étaient encore en place. La cratérisation était de 0,69 mm en moyenne (sd. 1.29) et ne semblait pas différente en fonction des paramètres étudiés. Conclusion : Malgré les limites de cette étude, il semblerait qu'il y ait peu d'impact de la solidarisation des couronnes sur la cratérisation péri-implantaire.Abstract -Effects of prosthesis splinting or not on peri-implant bone loss: a prospective clinical study with a 5-year follow-up period. Introduction: The study presented sought to demonstrate a possible relation between the splinting of crowns on short implants (6-8 mm long) placed in the posterior mandibular sector and bone loss around these implants. Materials and methods: The sample of patients participating in this multicenter prospective study included the first 54 patients included in a study on short implants. Their inclusion required that they present a mandibular free posterior gap, with bone height between 8 and 10 mm, as well as a bone ridge greater than 6 mm above the alveolar canal. Treatment comprised implanting prostheses onto implants, with the number of implants identical to the number of teeth to be replaced. Bone loss around the implants was measured radiologically during surgical placement and then once a year for 5 years. Results: This study included 124 implants placed in 52 patients who received at least one implant and a maximum of six implants. The sex ratio was relatively well balanced, with 56% females versus 44% males. At 5 years, based on the number of patients presenting at the follow-up visit, 89 implants were assessed. One hundred percent of the implants placed were still in place. Peri-implant bone loss was a mean 0.69 mm (SD 1.29

show abstract

“…These four implants were subsequently osseointegrated. Thus, if in individual rehabilitation, an insertion torque of <30 N/cm may be a contraindication to immediate implant loading, presumably that is not the case in total rehabilitation, insofar as the implant is connected to other implants with higher primary fixity through the immediate prosthesis, which plays the role of rigid restraints and allows to decrease implant micromovements [2,3]. It is interesting to note that in our study, the majority of implant failures occurred in the first months following the intervention.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It provides the advantage of offering quick, comfortable aesthetic and functional restoration to the patient. It also ensures strong retention between implants, limiting the amplitude of the micromovements to the bone-implant interface below the critical threshold for osseointegration [2] and decreasing the constraints transferred to the surrounding bone [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maxillary restoration with complete maxillary prosthesis supported by implants with immediate loading: clinical retrospective study of 48 cases

Fau

Diep

Benateau

et al. 2017

Med Buccale Chir Buccale

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

--Introduction:In recent years, the immediate loading procedure for the rehabilitation of edentulous jaws has gained popularity among patients and practitioners. The purpose of this study was to evaluate implant and prosthetic success rates for the rehabilitation of edentulous maxillae using tilted distal implants and immediate loading of prostheses, after 2 years. Material and method: Patients included in the study received a complete prosthesis of the upper arch, attached to 4, 5 or 6 implants. The provisional prosthesis was fixed the same day the implants were placed. After a period of osseointegration, the provisional prosthesis was replaced by a definitive prosthesis with a titanium framework made using computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacturing (CAD/ CAM) technology. Judgment criteria were the implant success rate, the provisional prosthesis success rate, and the definitive prosthetic success rate. Results: Two hundred and forty-two implants were placed in 48 patients. Five implants were lost, resulting in an implant survival at 2 years of 97.9%. Two provisional fixed prosthesis had to be temporarily replaced by a removable solution, resulting in a provisional prosthesis success rate of 95.8%. The definitive prosthesis success rate was 100%. Discussion: Use of a provisional prosthesis during the osseointegration period is essential, both for the preparation of the final prosthesis as well as for proper management of potential implant failures. Implant failures are more easily managed if at least five implants were originally placed.

show abstract

A Finite Element Analysis of Stress Distribution in Bone Tissue Surrounding Uncoupled or Splinted Dental Implants

Abstract: From a mechanical viewpoint, FEM simulation supports the hypothesis that splinting reduces damage evolution in bone tissue, which agrees with clinical observations.

Cited by 79 publications

References 17 publications

FEM and VonMises analyses of different dental implant shapes for masticatory loading distribution

FEM and VonMises analyses of different dental implant shapes for masticatory loading distribution

Impact de la solidarisation des couronnes implanto-portées sur le remodelage osseux péri-implantaire : étude clinique prospective avec suivi à 5 ans

Maxillary restoration with complete maxillary prosthesis supported by implants with immediate loading: clinical retrospective study of 48 cases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About