Astra Tech, Brånemark, and ITI Implants in the Rehabilitation of Partial Edentulism: Two-Year Results

Bilhan, Hakan; Kutay, Ömer; Arat, Selda; Çekici, Ali; Çehreli, Murat Cavit

doi:10.1097/id.0b013e3181f57110

Cited by 27 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The principal stress value in the peri-implant cortical bone in model III was the highest, model I had the lowest. Some research reported Brånemark implant had higher marginal bone loss in the first year of function; 29 however, the simple cumulative survival rate value in first year was 99.2%. 30 A comprehensive literature reviews suggest that marginal bone loss is due to the high stress in the peri-implant cortical bone.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Nonlinear finite element analysis of three implant–abutment interface designs

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to investigate the mechanical characteristics of implant–abutment interface design in a dental implant system, using nonlinear finite element analysis (FEA) method. This finite element simulation study was applied on three commonly used commercial dental implant systems: model I, the reduced-diameter 3i implant system (West Palm Beach, FL, USA) with a hex and a 12-point double internal hexagonal connection; model II, the Semados implant system (Bego, Bremen, Germany) with combination of a conical (45° taper) and internal hexagonal connection; and model III, the Brånemark implant system (Nobel Biocare, Gothenburg, Sweden) with external hexagonal connection. In simulation, a force of 170 N with 45° oblique to the longitudinal axis of the implant was loaded to the top surface of the abutment. It has been found from the strength and stiffness analysis that the 3i implant system has the lowest maximum von Mises stress, principal stress and displacement while the Brånemark implant system has the highest. It was concluded from our preliminary study using nonlinear FEA that the reduced-diameter 3i implant system with a hex and a 12-point double internal hexagonal connection had a better stress distribution, and produced a smaller displacement than the other two implant systems.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Nonlinear finite element analysis of three implant–abutment interface designs

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regarding implant survival and success rates of included data revealed that conical and nonconical implant–abutment connection systems do not differ statistically. However, three studies documented less marginal bone level changes for conical connection systems, two out of these with a significant difference . Only one study documented higher marginal bone losses around conical implant–abutment connection systems compared to nonconical ones (Table ) …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two studies documented implant success and bone level changes around immediately placed and loaded conical and nonconical implant–abutment connection implants . Further studies followed delayed implant placement protocols with submerged or nonsubmerged healing and delayed or immediate loading protocols . Regarding implant survival and success rates of included data revealed that conical and nonconical implant–abutment connection systems do not differ statistically.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding study characteristics of the clinical studies (animal and human) included in this review it was found that many different experimental approaches were utilized, particularly in the implant placement and loading protocols . Such variation makes it difficult, albeit not impossible to compare the outcomes of the different investigations to one another.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Performance of conical abutment (Morse Taper) connection implants: A systematic review

Schmitt

Nogueira-Filho

Tenenbaum

et al. 2013

J Biomedical Materials Res

189

182

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this systematic review, we aimed to compare conical versus nonconical implant-abutment connection systems in terms of their in vitro and in vivo performances. An electronic search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Medline databases with the logical operators: "dental implant" AND "dental abutment" AND ("conical" OR "taper" OR "cone"). Names of the most common conical implant-abutment connection systems were used as additional key words to detect further data. The search was limited to articles published up to November 2012. Recent publications were also searched manually in order to find any relevant studies that might have been missed using the search criteria noted above. Fifty-two studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in this systematic review. As the data and methods, as well as types of implants used was so heterogeneous, this mitigated against the performance of meta-analysis. In vitro studies indicated that conical and nonconical abutments showed sufficient resistance to maximal bending forces and fatigue loading. However, conical abutments showed superiority in terms of seal performance, microgap formation, torque maintenance, and abutment stability. In vivo studies (human and animal) indicated that conical and nonconical systems are comparable in terms of implant success and survival rates with less marginal bone loss around conical connection implants in most cases. This review indicates that implant systems using a conical implant-abutment connection, provides better results in terms of abutment fit, stability, and seal performance. These design features could lead to improvements over time versus nonconical connection systems.

show abstract

“…Dental implants are considered to be a predictable treatment option for rehabilitation of edentulous patients and have demonstrated high success rates, reestablishing masticatory function and aesthetics [1]. Maintenance of bone tissue around the implant, however, is still considered to be a significant challenge, primarily for implants placed in atrophic maxillary posterior regions [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Splinted and Nonsplinted Crowns with Different Implant Lengths in the Posterior Maxilla by Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis

Lemos

Verri

Santiago

et al. 2018

Journal of Healthcare Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate stress distribution in the implants/components and bone tissue for splinted and nonsplinted prostheses with different lengths of implants using three-dimensional finite element analysis. Six models from the posterior maxillary area were used in simulations. Each model simulated three Morse taper implants of 4.0 mm diameter with different lengths, which supported metal-ceramic crowns. An axial load of 400 N and an oblique load of 200 N were used as loading conditions. Splinted prostheses exhibited better stress distribution for the implants/components, whereas nonsplinted prostheses exhibited higher stress in the first molar under axial/oblique loading. Implant length did not influence stress distribution in the implants/components. In cortical bone tissue, splinted prostheses decreased the tensile stress in the first molar, whereas nonsplinted prostheses were subjected to higher tensile stress in the first molar; implant length had no influence on stress distribution. Within the limitations of this study, we conclude that splinted prostheses contributed to better stress distribution in the implant/abutment and cortical bone tissue; however, the reduction in the implant length did not influence the stress distribution.

show abstract

Astra Tech, Brånemark, and ITI Implants in the Rehabilitation of Partial Edentulism: Two-Year Results

Abstract: Astra Tech, Brånemark, and ITI implants supporting fixed prostheses had same survival rates (100%) in this study. ITI and Astra Tech implants had similar changes in marginal bone levels, whereas Brånemark implants had higher marginal bone loss, particularly in the first year of function.

Cited by 27 publications

References 24 publications

Nonlinear finite element analysis of three implant–abutment interface designs

Nonlinear finite element analysis of three implant–abutment interface designs

Performance of conical abutment (Morse Taper) connection implants: A systematic review

Splinted and Nonsplinted Crowns with Different Implant Lengths in the Posterior Maxilla by Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About