A biomechanical investigation of mandibular molar implants: reproducibility and validity of a finite element analysis model

Omori, Miyuki; Sato, Yuji; Kitagawa, Noboru; Shimura, Yoshie; Ito, Manabu

doi:10.1186/s40729-015-0011-5

Cited by 40 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Analysis was done with FEA models, in which the cancellous bone was simplified as being a homogeneous body. FEA models have been reported to be useful for verifying the behavior of implants when loaded [ 22 ], and so, the effects of different placements were verified with FEA models and compared with the results from the experimental models. In a previous study, Omori et al compared the compressed displacement between experimental models and FEA models to verify the validity of the FEA models [ 22 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The mesh was constructed of tetrahedral elements, and the total numbers of nodes and elements were approximately 260,000 and 1,400,000, respectively. FEA models were prepared with appropriate physical properties (Table 1 ) determined by consulting the values published by the manufacturer of the artificial mandible models and Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio used in past research [ 22 ]. The implant, abutment, and superstructure were assumed to be a continuous structure made of titanium; no intervening conditions were set between the implant and abutment nor between the abutment and superstructure.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Biomechanical effects of offset placement of dental implants in the edentulous posterior mandible

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundProper implant placement is very important for long-term implant stability. Recently, numerous biomechanical studies have been conducted to clarify the relationship between implant placement and peri-implant stress. The placement of multiple implants in the edentulous posterior mandible has been studied by geometric analysis, three-dimensional finite element analysis (FEA), model experimentation, etc. Offset placement is a technique that reduces peri-implant load. However, few studies have used multiple analyses to clarify the value of the offset placement under identical conditions.The present study aimed to clarify the biomechanical effects of offset placement on the peri-implant bone in edentulous posterior mandibles by comparative investigation using FEA and model experimentation with strain gauges.MethodsThree implants were embedded in an artificial mandible in the parts corresponding to the first premolar, the second premolar, and the first molar. A titanium superstructure was mounted to prepare models (experimental models). Three load points (buccal, central, and lingual) were established on the part of the superstructure corresponding to the first molar. Three types of experimental models, each with a different implant placement, were prepared. In one model, the implants were placed in a straight line; in the other two, the implants in the parts corresponding to the second premolar and the first molar were offset each by a 1-mm increment to the buccal or lingual side. Four strain gauges were applied to the peri-implant bone corresponding to the first molar.The experimental models were imaged by micro-computed tomography (CT), and FEA models were constructed from the CT data. A vertical load of 100 N was applied on the three load points in the experimental models and in the FEA models. The extent of compressed displacement and the strain in the peri-implant bone were compared between the experimental models and the FEA models.ResultsBoth experimental and FEA models suffered the least compressed displacement during central loading in all placements. The greatest stress and compressive strain was on the load side in all types of placements.ConclusionsOffset placement may not necessarily be more biomechanically effective than straight placement in edentulous posterior mandibles.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanical effects of offset placement of dental implants in the edentulous posterior mandible

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The FEA has been chosen for this study as it has been an effective method for investigating the behavioral tendencies and predicting stress distribution on implants and surrounding bone under loading conditions. (21) Regarding the results of this study, the stress level was more in the bone defect configuration than the models with no bone defects. This could be attributed to the length of the fulcrum arm which is longer in case of vertical defect.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

Comparison of the Effect of Different Implant Connections on Stress Distribution Around Dental Implants (In Vitro Study)

.Soliman

Din

Bissar

2020

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Statement of the problem: In implant dentistry literature, the most commonly investigated materials/structures in finite element analysis studies are either implant, peri-implant bone (cortical and cancellous bone), and restoration. This method allows application of simulated forces at specific points in the system and analysis of stress in the implant and peri-implant region. The implant connection design and other factors as the prosthesis type, its height and material have a great effect on stresses falling on the bone around implant Objectives: to evaluate and compare stress distribution using (3dimensional) finite element analysis between implants with Internal Hex and Morse Taper connections that were simulated in bone without vertical defect and with 6 mm vertical defect. Material and methods: In this study, the implants examined were titanium implants with Morse taper and internal hex connections. These implants were utilized in the two configurations that were designed in this study. In the first configuration, the jawbone has no vertical defect and composed of (starting from top down) one mm layer of crestal cortical bone, 3.5 mm layer of cancellous bone, 0.5 mm sinus cortical bone. In the second configuration, it is composed of (starting from top down) one mm layer of crestal cortical bone, 3.5 mm layer of cancellous bone, 0.5 mm sinus cortical bone with a 6 mm vertical bone defect was created. The force of 100N is applied in axial, oblique and axial and oblique directions. Stresses falling on surrounding bone, fixture, abutment and screw were analyzed using finite element analysis in the two different configurations. Results: The maximum Von Mises stresses for different loading conditions were recorded at different areas of the implant abutment assembly and in the surrounding bone and it was found that in all direction of forces, the stress levels falling on the bone, abutment, fixture and screw were more in the bone defect configuration than the models with no bone defects.In all direction of forces, the implants with Morse taper abutments showed less stress on the fixture compared to internal hex abutments in both models with and without defect. Conclusion: Morse taper connections showed less stresses on the bone, fixture, abutment and screw than the internal Hex connection regardless of the bone height. Furthermore, stress distribution was more with implant in the 6 mm vertical defect than that in the bone without defect.

show abstract

“…Clinical study reports that the predictable success rate of endosseous implants in many systems was greater than 90%. [12] Success or failure of implant and prosthesis is due to various biomechanical factors such as implant geometry, which includes diameter, length, and taper; surface topography such as thread pitch, type, and number; and magnitude and direction of masticatory force to implant through abutment and prosthesis. Para-functional force also plays a vital role in failure of implant treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, it is advisable to focus on qualitative comparison rather than quantitative data from these analyses. Richter[1218] quantifies the vertical forces applied to dental implants during oral functions. Implants in the molar position that were fixed to a premolar with a prosthesis withstood maximum vertical forces of 60–120 N during chewing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative evaluation of implant designs: Influence of diameter, length, and taper on stress and strain in the mandibular segment—A three-dimensional finite element analysis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Success or failure of dental implants depends on the amount of stress transferred to the surrounding bone. Increased amount of loading to the bone through implant cause failure, whereas decrease in the amount of loading to the bone causes improved success rate of implants. Biomechanical interaction between implant and bone decides the long-term function or prognosis of dental implant system. Aim and Objectives: The aims of this study were to evaluate the influence of implant length and diameter on stress distribution, to understand the stress distribution around bone–implant interface, and to understand the response of bone under axial and non-axial loading conditions. Materials and Methods: Finite element three-dimensional mandibular model was made using cone beam computed tomography of patient with completely edentulous mandible, and in that model five posterior bone segments were selected. NobelReplace Select Tapered implants with diameters and lengths 3.5 × 10 mm, 4.3 × 10 mm, 3.5 × 11.5 mm, and 4.3 × 11.5 mm, respectively were selected and three dimensionally modeled using Creo 2.0 Parametric Pro/E software. Bone and implant models were assembled as 20 models and finite element analysis was performed using ANSYS Workbench v17.0 under axial and non-axial loads. Result: Under axial and non-axial loads, 3.5 × 10 mm implant showed maximum von Mises stress and strain in both cortical and cancellous bone whereas implant with diameter and length 4.3 × 11.5 mm showed minimum von Mises stress and strain in both cortical and cancellous bone. Conclusion: In axial and non-axial loads, amount of stress distribution around implant–bone interface is influenced by diameter and length of implant in cortical and cancellous bone, respectively. Increased diameter of the implant produces the minimum stress in cortical bone. Increased length of the implant produces the minimum stress in cancellous bone.

show abstract

A biomechanical investigation of mandibular molar implants: reproducibility and validity of a finite element analysis model

Cited by 40 publications

References 22 publications

Biomechanical effects of offset placement of dental implants in the edentulous posterior mandible

Biomechanical effects of offset placement of dental implants in the edentulous posterior mandible

Comparison of the Effect of Different Implant Connections on Stress Distribution Around Dental Implants (In Vitro Study)

Comparative evaluation of implant designs: Influence of diameter, length, and taper on stress and strain in the mandibular segment—A three-dimensional finite element analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About