A Further Finite Element Stress Analysis of Angled Abutments for an Implant Placed in the Anterior Maxilla

Abstract

To systematically measure and compare the stress distribution on the bone around an implant in the anterior maxilla using angled abutments by means of finite element analysis, three-dimensional finite element simplified patient-specific models and simplified models were created and analyzed. Systematically varied angled abutments were simulated, with angulation ranging from 0° to 60°. The materials in the current study were assumed to be homogenous, linearly elastic, and isotropic. Force of 100 N was applied to the central node on the top surface of the abutments to simulate the occlusal force. To simulate axial and oblique loading, the angle of loading was 0°, 15°, and 20° to the long axis of implant, respectively. There was the strong resemblance between the response curves for simplified patient-specific models and simplified models. Response curves under oblique loading were similar in both models. With abutments angulation increased, maximum von Mises stress firstly decreased to minimum point and then gradually increased to higher level. From a biomechanical point of view, favorable peri-implant stress levels could be induced by angled abutments under oblique loading if suitable angulation of abutments was selected.

Evaluation of Stress Generated with Different Abutment Materials and Angulations under Axial and Oblique Loading in the Anterior Maxilla: Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis

“…When angled abutments are used, the stress is distributed asymmetrically with an increase in von Mises stress in the area opposite to the direction of the abutment. The oblique force of 178 N showed lesser values of stress than the axial force of 178 N. These results are in agreement with previous studies [ 20 , 35 ]. However, they are not in accordance with the study conducted by Guven et al [ 17 ] and Bahuguna et al [ 29 ].…”

“…Wu et al [ 20 ] showed similar findings in their study, showing a decrease in the magnitude of von Mises stress with oblique loading in angulated abutments up to 27°. When the direction of load is opposite to the direction of angled abutment, it decreases the stress on the surrounding bone and the implant.…”

“…All the geometric models, i.e., implant components, abutment systems and their components, crown prosthesis, and the bone, were combined together with Boolean's operation [ 20 ] to create six three-dimensional working models in ANSYS 15.0 Workbench software ( Table 1 ). The final models consisted of a single implant embedded in the left maxillary central incisor region of the anterior maxillary model with an abutment of suitable material and angulation and a restored crown ( Figure 1 ).…”

Correlation between abutment angulation and off-axial stresses on biomechanical behavior of titanium and zirconium implants in the anterior maxilla: A three-dimensional finite element analysis study

“…Although positing of implant and provision of over jet may decrease stresses, they will affect the esthetics and functional outcome of implant restorations in the anterior maxilla. [ 17 ] Cone beam computed tomography-guided implant placement in the anterior maxilla will overcome the possibility of an angulated abutments, yet expensive; hence, its use can be restricted to place multiple implants in the same region. [ 35 36 37 38 ] Therefore, further studies can be carried out with improvements made to finite element models with respect to geometry of implants with regard to thread pitch, thread shape, and thread depth, applying dynamic loading conditions depending on the clinical situation.…”

“…Hence, this study was conducted to analyze the correlation between abutment angulation and off-axial stresses on biomechanical behavior of titanium and zirconium implants. [ 5 9 11 12 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 ] The purpose of the present study is (1) to evaluate the stress distribution around the titanium implant with porcelain fused to titanium superstructure at implant–bone interface, implant–abutment interface, and within superstructure and zirconium implant with zirconia superstructure at implant–bone interface, implant–abutment interface, and within the superstructure and (2) to compare stresses of titanium and zirconium implant at implant–bone interface, within superstructure, and at implant–abutment interface with 0°, 15°, and 25° abutment angulations.…”