The evaluation of stress on bone level and tissue level short implants: A Finite Element Analysis (FEA) study

Avağ, Canseda; Akkocaoğlu, Murat

doi:10.1016/j.jormas.2022.09.019

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This result aligns with the data available in the literature, indicating no difference in terms of MBL between the two implant types [ 19 ]; if there is adequate keratinized gingiva around the implant, the success rate is almost the same [ 20 ]. Based on in vitro tests, higher stress values can be measured around short BL implants but are not high enough to cause failure [ 21 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes of treatment with short dental implants compared with standard-length implants: a retrospective clinical study

Bérczy,

Göndöcs,

Komlós

et al. 2024

Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The size of dental implants is a key success factor for appropriate osseointegration. Using shorter implants allows the possibility of avoiding complex surgical procedures and reduces the morbidity of treatment. Shorter implants also enable implant-prosthetic rehabilitation after maxillofacial reconstructions where only limited bone is available. In this study, the success rates of short implants were examined and compared to those of standard-sized implants. Methods Patients who received dental implants between 2007 and 2016 at the Department of Oro-Maxillofacial Surgery and Stomatology Semmelweis University were enrolled in the study. Several clinical parameters were recorded and supplemented with radiological examinations. The data were statistically analysed. Results Thirty-four patients with a total of 60 implants were included. The average time after prosthetic loading was 39.33 ± 21.96 months in the group with 8-mm implants and 41.6 ± 27.5 months in the group with > 8-mm implants. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of probing depth (short implants, 2.84 ± 0.09 mm; standard implants, 2.91 ± 0.35 mm) or mean marginal bone loss (short implants, 1.2 ± 1.21-mm mesially and 1.36 ± 1.47-mm distally; standard implants: 0.63 ± 0.80-mm mesially and 0.78 ± 0.70-mm distally). Conclusions In this study, the success rate of short dental implants was comparable to that of standard-sized implants. Consequently, it can be claimed that the long-term success of short dental implants does not differ significantly from the long-term success of standard implants.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes of treatment with short dental implants compared with standard-length implants: a retrospective clinical study

Bérczy,

Göndöcs,

Komlós

et al. 2024

Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Structural Analysis of Thumb Mechanism Exoskeleton Design for Post-Stroke Rehabilitation

Qoryah,

Guntur,

Nurhadi

et al. 2023

2023 International Conference on Advanced Mechatronics, Intelligent Manufacture and Industrial Automation (ICAMIMIA)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Influence of a new abutment design concept on the biomechanics of peri-implant bone, implant components, and microgap formation: a finite element analysis

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background A new two-piece abutment design consisting of an upper prosthetic component and tissue-level base has been introduced; however, the biomechanical behavior of such a design has not been documented. This study aimed to investigate the effect of a two-piece abutment design on the stress in the implant components and surrounding bone, as well as its influence on microgap formation. Methods To simulate the implant models in the mandibular left first molar area, we established nine experimental groups that included three bone qualities (type II, III, and IV) and three implant–abutment designs (internal bone level, tissue level, and a two-piece design). After the screw was preloaded, the maximum occlusal (600 N) and masticatory (225 N) forces were established. Finite element analysis was performed to analyze the maximum and minimum principal stresses on the peri-implant bone; the von Mises stresses in the implants, abutments, bases, and screws, and the microgaps at the implant–abutment, implant–base, and base–abutment interfaces. Results For all three loading methods, the two-piece abutment design and bone-level connection exhibited similarities in the maximum and minimum principal stresses in the peri-implant bone. The von Mises stresses in both screws and bases were greater for the two-piece design than for the other connection types. The smallest microgap was detected in the tissue-level connection; the largest was observed at the implant–base interface in the two-piece design. Conclusions The present study found no evidence that the abutment design exerts a significant effect on peri-implant bone stress. However, the mechanical effects associated with the base and screws should be noted when using a two-piece abutment design. The two-piece abutment design also had no advantage in eliminating the microgap.

show abstract

The evaluation of stress on bone level and tissue level short implants: A Finite Element Analysis (FEA) study

Cited by 5 publications

References 24 publications

Outcomes of treatment with short dental implants compared with standard-length implants: a retrospective clinical study

Outcomes of treatment with short dental implants compared with standard-length implants: a retrospective clinical study

Structural Analysis of Thumb Mechanism Exoskeleton Design for Post-Stroke Rehabilitation

Influence of a new abutment design concept on the biomechanics of peri-implant bone, implant components, and microgap formation: a finite element analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About