Finite‐Element Analysis of Stress on Dental Implant Prosthesis

Rubo, José Henrique; Souza, Éder Carlos Ferreira de

doi:10.1111/j.1708-8208.2008.00142.x

Cited by 84 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In other research (Rubo & & Capello Souza, 2010) was observed that the increase in stress was proportional to the size of the cantilever, which would be of benefit when using tilted implants. Silva-Neto et al (2013) reported that tilted implants exhibited high stress in the finite analysis, although these is a positive influence on decreasing the load in some zones because the reduction in the distal cantilever area.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stress Analysis in Maxillary All-On-Four Model

Cidade

Olate

Pozzer

et al. 2015

Int. J. Odontostomat.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this research was to evaluate the load distribution in tilted distal implants used in the all-onfour system. Two implant schemes were used. In both, two vertical anterior implants and tilted posterior implants were installed, one group with an angulation of 15º and another with an angulation of 35º. The implants were installed together with a bar binding them all in a photoelastic model obtained from a replica of an edentulous maxilla. In this model, loads were produced in the sector of the bar cantilever, the abutment of the tilted implants and over the four implants using devices specially designed for this purpose. The bands were recorded with a digital camera, and the qualitative and quantitative analyses were carried out by means of student's t-test and the Mann-Whitney test in Biostat v. 5.0, considering a level of p<0.05 to establish a statistically significant relation. In the qualitative analysis, the implant with 35º presented the greatest amount of stress on the cantilever forces at cervical level. The quantitative studies showed fewer differences in all aspects assessed, although significant differences were observed between the two systems when loads were applied at cantilever level. It can be concluded that there are minimal differences in the stress distribution when comparing implants with angulations of 15º or 35º. However, there is a greater concentration of stress at the cervical level in implants tilted to 35º.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stress Analysis in Maxillary All-On-Four Model

Cidade

Olate

Pozzer

et al. 2015

Int. J. Odontostomat.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…10,11 Despite this, a biomechanical study has concluded that the tilting of the implants induced a high stress level in bone-implant interface compared to parallel model. 13,14,15 A 3D finite element analysis demonstrated that the increase of tension on the implants was proportional to the lengths of cantilever, which favors the use of tilted implants since they reduce the size thereof.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…13,14,15 A 3D finite element analysis demonstrated that the increase of tension on the implants was proportional to the lengths of cantilever, which favors the use of tilted implants since they reduce the size thereof. 11 However few studies compare different degree of inclinations or different load conditions. Considering the distal load was found that the increase of the implant inclination from 15° to 35° did not resulted in high stress values, without cervical or apical stress concentration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…8 This allows cases with severe resorption to be rehabilitated with reduce bone grafting procedures and enables immediate prosthetic rehabilitation of patients seeking a minimum surgical time with a reduced number of implants without losing the expectation of success in the treatment. 9 Tilted implants also allow an increase of length of implants and reduced cantilever extension 10,11 without difference in marginal bone loss and implant survival. 12 The term tilted implants refers to implants placed at 15° or larger angles than the traditional vertical implants.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Photoelastic analysis of all-on-four concept using different implants angulations for maxilla

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conventional tilted implants are used in oral rehabilitation for heavily absorbed maxilla to avoid bone grafts; however, few research studies evaluate the biomechanical behavior when different angulations of the implants are used. The aim of this study was evaluate, trough photoelastic method, two different angulations and length of the cantilever in fixed implant-supported maxillary complete dentures. Two groups were evaluated: G15 (distal tilted implants 15°) and G35 (distal tilted implants 35°) n = 6. For each model, 2 distal tilted implants (3.5 x 15 mm long cylindrical cone) and 2 parallel tilted implants in the anterior region (3.5 x 10 mm) were installed. Photoelastic models were submitted to three vertical load tests: in the end of cantilever, in the last pillar and in the all pillars at the same time. We obtained the shear stress by Fringes software and found values for total, cervical and apical stress. The quantitative analysis was performed using the Student tests and Mann-Whitney test; p ≥ 0.05. There is no difference between G15 and G35 for total stress regardless of load type. Analyzing the apical region, G35 reduced strain values considering the distal loads (in the cantilever p = 0.03 and in the last pillar p = 0.02), without increasing the stress level in the cervical region. Considering the load in all pillars, G35 showed higher stress concentration in the cervical region (p = 0.04). For distal loads, G15 showed increase of tension in the apical region, while for load in all pillars, G35 inclination increases stress values in the cervical region.

show abstract

“…If the loading stimulus is between the upper and lower threshold values, remodeling will not occur. Moreover, where mechanical loading increases excessively resorption may occur with bone loss 6 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interdental alveolar bone density in bruxers, mild bruxers, and non-bruxers affected by orthodontia and impaction as influencing factors.

Shokry¹,

Rahman²,

Kandil³

et al. 2015

J Oral Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interdental alveolar bone density in bruxers, mild bruxers, and non-bruxers affected by orthodontia and impaction as influencing factors. Abstract: Aim: To assess the interdental alveolar bone density within specific regions of interest in the mandible of bruxers, mild bruxers and non-bruxers in absence or presence of influencing factors, such as orthodontia and impaction. Materials and methods: The study consisted of 104 subjects (64 bruxers and 40 controls) from the female students in the Faculty of Dentistry. Students were classified into bruxers, non-bruxers, and mild bruxers. The presence of modifying factors, such as impacted mandibular third molars and/or current or recent orthodontic treatment were identified. Panoramic radiographs were obtained, and the mean bone density values of interdental alveolar bone were measured using ImageJ software. Results: Nonbruxers had the highest mean bone density in all measured regions. The mesial aspect of the second premolar was an area of higher mean bone density in bruxers and in mild bruxers, compared to non-bruxers. In the presence of orthodontic treatment, the mean bone density in non-bruxers surpassed that of bruxers and mild bruxers. Conclusion: Bruxism, whether mild or severe decreased the interdental mean bone density in the studied regions of interest. The presence of influencing factors affected the interdental mean bone density.

show abstract

Finite‐Element Analysis of Stress on Dental Implant Prosthesis

Abstract: The relative physical properties of the many materials involved in an implant-supported prosthesis system affect the way stresses are distributed.

Cited by 84 publications

References 20 publications

Stress Analysis in Maxillary All-On-Four Model

Stress Analysis in Maxillary All-On-Four Model

Photoelastic analysis of all-on-four concept using different implants angulations for maxilla

Interdental alveolar bone density in bruxers, mild bruxers, and non-bruxers affected by orthodontia and impaction as influencing factors.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About