Biomechanics of oral implants: a review of the literature

Influence of Cusp Inclination on Stress Distribution in Implant‐Supported Prostheses. A Three‐Dimensional Finite Element Analysis

“…Diminished deformation energy in a structure often increases the loading in other structures. 14 In this case, the stress is absorbed by the implant, reducing stress concentrations on other structures such as the cortical bone.…”

“…[2][3][4] Therefore, it is necessary to optimize the distribution of occlusal loads between the prosthesis, the implant, and the surrounding bone. 7,8 Load transfer at the bone/implant interface depends on the type of loading, 9,10 the material properties of the implant and prosthesis, the quality and quantity of the surrounding bone, 10 the implant geometry (length, diameter, and shape), [11][12][13][14][15] and the implant surface structure. 11 Some analyses have pointed out that the occlusal configuration and cusp inclination of implant-supported prostheses play a significant role in force transmission and the stress-strain relationship between the prosthesis and the bone.…”

Biomechanical stress in bone surrounding an implant under simulated chewing

“…Among these methods, finite element stress analysis is practicable to quantify internal stress in the model. The load transfer from implants to surrounding bone depends on the type of loading, the bone-implant interface, the length and diameter of the implants, the implant shape, structure of the implant surface, the superstructure and the quality and quality of the surrounding bone (Duyck et al 1997).…”

“…However, there has been no study that has analyzed the loading condition under chewing function. Mastication induces vertical and transverse forces, which induce axial forces and bending moments and exert stress gradients in the implant as well as in the bone (Duyck et al 1997). Therefore, in this study, the directions of the closing pathways of the mandible during chewing movement were investigated.…”

Comparative evaluation of implant designs: influence of diameter, length, and taper on strains in the alveolar crest

“…Several investigators have attempted to minimize crestal bone loss by increasing the contact area of bone-to-implant interface and therefore reducing stress at the cortical alveolar crest. Attempts to increase the contact area of bone-to-implant interface have focused on increasing the diameter and/or the length of the implant, or altering the fixture design/shape (Matsushita et al 1990;Meijer et al 1992;Duyck et al 1997;Palmer et al 1997;Holmgren et al 1998;Nordin et al 1998;Norton 1998;Chun et al 2002;Tada et al 2003).…”