Three-Dimensional FEA Analysis of the Stress Distribution on Titanium and Graphene Frameworks Supported by 3 or 6-Implant Models

Abstract

Titanium is the main component of dental implants. It is also routinely used as a framework material for implant-supported full-arch prostheses due to its low density, biocompatibility, and other mechanical properties. Remarkable mechanical properties such as lesser mass density and higher young’s modulus of graphene have gained popularity among scientists, improving the properties of biomedical implants. Thus, our study aimed to compare the outcome through the von Mises stresses generated on All-on-6 and All-on-3 implant models, as well as on the framework, and evaluate the effect of stress patterns on the crestal bone around implants in the mandible. FEA (Finite Element Analysis) study was carried out using edentulous mandible models. Four 3D FEA models with 3 and 6 implants were used (Model 1: Titanium bar-supported 6 straight implants; Model 2: Graphene bar-supported 6 straight implants; Model 3: Titanium bar-supported 3 implants with 30 degrees-tilted; Model 4: Graphene bar-supported 3 implants with 30 degrees-tilted) in order to simulate endosseous implant designs. The implant measuring 4.2 mm in diameter and 11.5 mm in length were used. The most distal implants in the 3-implant models were placed with angulation of 30 degrees; in 6 implants, they were vertically placed. All the models were analyzed for vertical and oblique axis with a single force magnitude of 100 N. In all four implant models and under loading conditions, the peak stress points were always on the neck of the most distal implant. von Mises stresses were within the normal stress range. In a conventional six-straight implant model supported by a titanium framework, the cortical stress in the region of implants was 25.27 MPa, whereas, in the graphene framework, it was 12.18 MPa. Under vertical load, there was a significant difference in the cortical stress around the tilted implants (30 degrees) in the 3-implant system of titanium and graphene frameworks, respectively, 70.31 MPa and 21.27 MPa. The graphene framework demonstrated better results than the titanium framework for the conventional six-implant system under vertical load, achieving stress of 30.09 MPa and 76.60 MPa, respectively. In the case of the 3-implant system, a significant difference in the bar stress was observed between graphene and titanium, respectively, 256.32 MPa and 180.1 MPa of bar stress. Within the limitation of this study, the peri-implant stresses were decreased using graphene framework models. Hence, it was possible to conclude that the best load-bearing capacity results were found in the graphene framework group compared to the titanium framework for All-on-6 and All-on-3 implant models, even though both materials are reliable options used as framework materials in implant-supported full-arch prostheses.

Three-dimensional finite element analysis of stress distribution on short implants with different bone conditions and osseointegration rates

“…The maximum stress in implants and cortical bone during oblique loading is higher than that observed during vertical loading, which aligns with the conclusions drawn by other researchers [ 27 , 28 ]. In this study, the maximum stresses exerted on the implant and cortical bone during inclined loading were higher than those observed during vertical loading.…”

Marginal Bone Level and Biomechanical Behavior of Titanium-Indexed Abutment Base of Conical Connection Used for Single Ceramic Crowns on Morse-Taper Implant: A Clinical Retrospective Study

“…Moreover, there was a limited computational approach due to being a clinical study. We recommend future simulation in medical investigations using implants, similar to a recent publication [ 68 ], offering advantages, such as lower cost and faster results compared to clinical studies.…”

Effect of crown retention systems and loading direction on the stress magnitude of posterior implant-supported restorations: A 3D-FEA

“…Therefore, results obtained from the numerical model can then be compared with those generated by previous studies, allowing researchers to assess the degree of reliability and refine their analyses accordingly. Despite being considered a sort of simplification, FEA isotropic models can be used as a valid approach for analyzing dental materials, particularly when anisotropic models are not available or when the level of anisotropy is low [ [32] , [33] , [34] , [35] , [36] ]. In summary, the stress results assist in overcoming the challenges involved in accurately modeling the behavior of dental materials that can present complex properties [ 37 ].…”