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

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

doi:10.1186/s40729-016-0050-6

Cited by 13 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the simulation results to be reliable, it is necessary to verify the results of FEA with experiments [ 34 ]. Some authors have examined the validity of finite element models by measuring implant displacement using an experimental model [ 35 36 ]. In the present study, abutment displacement was evaluated for model validation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of implant tilting and the loading direction on the displacement and micromotion of immediately loaded implants: an in vitro experiment and finite element analysis

Sugiura

Yamamoto

Horita

et al. 2017

J Periodontal Implant Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of implant tilting and the loading direction on the displacement and micromotion (relative displacement between the implant and bone) of immediately loaded implants by in vitro experiments and finite element analysis (FEA).MethodsSix artificial bone blocks were prepared. Six screw-type implants with a length of 10 mm and diameter of 4.3 mm were placed, with 3 positioned axially and 3 tilted. The tilted implants were 30° distally inclined to the axial implants. Vertical and mesiodistal oblique (45° angle) loads of 200 N were applied to the top of the abutment, and the abutment displacement was recorded. Nonlinear finite element models simulating the in vitro experiment were constructed, and the abutment displacement and micromotion were calculated. The data on the abutment displacement from in vitro experiments and FEA were compared, and the validity of the finite element model was evaluated.ResultsThe abutment displacement was greater under oblique loading than under axial loading and greater for the tilted implants than for the axial implants. The in vitro and FEA results showed satisfactory consistency. The maximum micromotion was 2.8- to 4.1-fold higher under oblique loading than under vertical loading. The maximum micromotion values in the axial and tilted implants were very close under vertical loading. However, in the tilted implant model, the maximum micromotion was 38.7% less than in the axial implant model under oblique loading. The relationship between abutment displacement and micromotion varied according to the loading direction (vertical or oblique) as well as the implant insertion angle (axial or tilted).ConclusionsTilted implants may have a lower maximum extent of micromotion than axial implants under mesiodistal oblique loading. The maximum micromotion values were strongly influenced by the loading direction. The maximum micromotion values did not reflect the abutment displacement values.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of implant tilting and the loading direction on the displacement and micromotion of immediately loaded implants: an in vitro experiment and finite element analysis

Sugiura

Yamamoto

Horita

et al. 2017

J Periodontal Implant Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…FEA is an efficient methodology, economical and accurate tool ( 17 ) that allows for absolute values and stress distribution. However, due to the use of an ideal situation, an in vitro experiment is often necessary to confirm the results ( 9 , 11 , 12 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The main methods used to verify the stress generated in experimental models are Photoelasticity, Strain Gauge (SG) and Digital Image Correlation. From the methods mentioned above, SG is widely used in studies with implants and consecrated to obtain absolute values ( 9 , 12 , 17 , 22 - 25 ). SGs can be used in experimental trials to accurately measure surface parameters, but the measurement areas are strictly specific and unable to verify internal bone strain, which can be complemented by FEA ( 11 , 12 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The importance of correct implants positioning and masticatory load direction on a fixed prosthesis

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThrough the biomechanical study of dental implants, it is possible to understand the dissipation effects of masticatory loads in different situations and prevent the longevity of osseointegration. Aims: To evaluate the microstrains generated around external hexagon implants, using axial and non-axial loads in a fixed four-element prosthesis with straight implants and implants inclined at 17°.Material and MethodsThree implants were modeled using CAD software following the manufacturer’s measurements. Then, implants were duplicated and divided into two groups: one with straight implants and respective abutments, and the other with angled implants at 17° and respective abutments. Both groups were arranged inside a block simulating bone tissue. A simplified fixed prosthesis was installed on both groups and the geometries were exported to CAE software. Five loads of 300N were performed at axial and non-axial points on the fixed prosthesis. Stress on the implants and strain on the block were both analyzed. An in vitro experiment was performed following all structures made in FEA in order to validate the model. In each experimental block, 4 strain gauges were linearly placed between the implants and the same loads were repeated with a loading applicator device.ResultsThe deformations computed by the gauges were correlated with the FEA results, showing that the group with inclined implants had more damaging biomechanical behavior and was significantly different from the group with straight implants (P<0.005).ConclusionsThe mathematical model used is valid and inclined implants can induce unwanted bone remodeling. Key words:Finite Element Analysis, Dental Implants, Fixed Prosthesis.

show abstract

“…Using a tilted implant may also provide some biomechanical benefits [13], such as increasing the contact area with the cortical bone and thereby also the implant's stability. Rearranging the position of implants supporting partial prostheses [14,15] and complete dentures [16] reportedly alters the stress and strain distribution in the bone around the implants and can improve their biomechanical performance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Positions and Angulations of Titanium Dental Implants in Biomechanical Performances in the All-on-Four Treatment: 3D Numerical and Strain Gauge Methods

Hsu

Fuh

et al. 2020

Metals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In finite element (FE) simulations, the peak bone stresses were higher when loading with a cantilever extension (CE) than when loading without a CE by 33–49% in the cortical bone. In the in vitro experiments, the highest values of principal strain were all within the range of the minimum principal strain, and those peak bone strains were 40–58% greater when loading with a CE than when loading without a CE (p < 0.001). This study investigated how varying the implanted position and angulation of anterior implants in the All-on-Four treatment influenced the biomechanical environment in the alveolar bone around the dental implants. Ten numerical simulations of FE models and three in vitro samples of All-on-Four treatment of dental implants were created to investigate the effects of altering the implanted position and angulation type of anterior implants. A single load of 100 N was applied in the molar region in the presence or absence of a CE of the denture. The 3D FE simulations analyzed the von-Mises stresses in the surrounding cortical bone and trabecular bone. For the in vitro tests, the principal bone strains were recorded by rosette strain gauges and statistically evaluated using the Mann–Whitney U test and the Kruskal–Wallis test. Loading in the presence of a CE of the denture induced the highest bone stress and strain, which were 53–97% greater in the FE simulation and 68–140% in the in vitro experiments (p < 0.008) than when loading without a CE. The bone stresses in the FE models of various implanted positions and angulation types of anterior implants were similar to those in the model of a typical All-on-Four treatment. In vitro tests revealed that the bone strains were significantly higher in the samples with various angulation types of anterior implants (p < 0.008). In the All-on-Four treatment of dental implants, the bone stress and strain were higher when the load was applied to the CE of dentures. Altering the position or angulation of the anterior dental implant in the All-on-Four treatment has no benefit in relieving the stress and strain of the bone around the dental implant.

show abstract

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

Cited by 13 publications

References 18 publications

Effects of implant tilting and the loading direction on the displacement and micromotion of immediately loaded implants: an in vitro experiment and finite element analysis

Effects of implant tilting and the loading direction on the displacement and micromotion of immediately loaded implants: an in vitro experiment and finite element analysis

The importance of correct implants positioning and masticatory load direction on a fixed prosthesis

Effects of Positions and Angulations of Titanium Dental Implants in Biomechanical Performances in the All-on-Four Treatment: 3D Numerical and Strain Gauge Methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About