Bone loading pattern around implants in average and atrophic edentulous maxillae: a finite-element analysis

Meyer, Ulrich; Vollmer, Dirk; Runte, Christoph; Bourauel, Christoph; Joos, Ulrich

doi:10.1054/jcms.2001.0198

Cited by 68 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…12 The relative elongation of cells may be calculated in microstrain (µε), the unit of strain measurement used in the present investigation. CTF system 10 created less microstrain compared to STF but the values achieved by both systems were far from the physiological threshold (>4000 µε) that would possibly lead to a long-term implant failure, according to Frost.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…11,15 Moreover, its modulus of elasticity (20 GPa) is similar to that of human bone. 11,16 In vivo, human bone presents a more complex situation when bone remodeling occurs during the healing period, 12 but experimental models may help to grade the materials or systems that deliver more favorable results prior to clinical applications.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…11 One thousand microstrains (1000 µε) was reported to correlate to a cell elongation of 0.1%. 12 Frost 13 distinguished a minimum effective strain of 500 µε needed for bone maintenance from the supra-physiological strain (>4000 µε)…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A microstrain comparison of passively fitting screw-retained and cemented titanium frameworks

Vasconcellos

Kojima

Mesquita

et al. 2014

The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM An imprecise fit between frameworks and supporting dental implants in loaded protocols increases the strain transferred to the periimplant bone, which may impair healing or generate microgaps. PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to investigate the microstrain between premachined 1-piece screw-retained frameworks (group STF) and screw-retained frameworks fabricated by cementing titanium cylinders to the prefabricated framework (group CTF). This procedure was developed to correct the misfit between frameworks and loaded implants. MATERIAL AND METH-ODS Four internal hexagon cylindrical implants were placed 10 mm apart in a polyurethane block by using the surgical guides of the corresponding implant system. Previously fabricated titanium frameworks (n=10) were divided into 2 groups. In group STF, prefabricated machined frameworks were used (n=5), and, in group CTF, the frameworks were fabricated by using a passive fit procedure, which was developed to correct the misfit between the cast titanium frameworks and supporting dental implants (n=5). Both groups were screw-retained under torque control (10 Ncm). Six strain gauges were placed on the upper surface of the polyurethane block, and 3 strain measurements were recorded for each framework. Data were analyzed with the Student t test (=.05). RESULTS The mean microstrain values between the framework and the implants were significantly higher for group STF (2517 m) than for group CTF (844 m) (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS Complete-arch implant frameworks designed for load application and fabricated by using the passive fit procedure decreased the strain between the frameworks and implants more than 1 piece prefabricated machined frameworks. Precision of fit between frameworks and supporting dental implants in immediately loaded protocols reduces the strain transfered to the peri-implant bone that may impair healing or generate micro-gaps. Purpose. This study investigated the microstrain between premachined one-piece screw-retained frameworks (STF) and screw-retained frameworks constructed by the procedure of cementing titanium cylinders to the pre-fabricated framework (CTF), which has been developed for correction of misfit between framework and immediately loaded implants. Material and methods. Four internal hex cylindrical implants were placed 10 mm distant to each other in a polyurethane block, using surgical guides of the corresponding implant system. Previously fabricated titanium frameworks (N=10) were distributed into 2 groups. While in group STF, pre-fabricated machined frameworks were used (n=5), in group CTF, the frameworks were constructed by a passive fit procedure, which has been developed for correction of misfit between cast titanium frameworks and supporting dental implants (n=5).CTF system was cemented first in the final cast and then screw retained to the implants. Both groups were screw-retained under torque control (10 N/cm). Six strain gauges were placed on the upper surface of the polyurethane block and 3 strain measurements...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A microstrain comparison of passively fitting screw-retained and cemented titanium frameworks

Vasconcellos

Kojima

Mesquita

et al. 2014

The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, bone density may differ among various regions of the same jaw and areas of differing densities may only be separated by milimeters. For simplification and to overcome computing difficulties, in most cases, the materials are modeled as homogenous, isotropic, and linearly elastic [35][36][37][38][39]. However, some studies have modeled the bone block using anisotropic properties (i.e., the material properties differ with respect to direction) [26].…”

Section: Modelization Of Non-living Structure (Materials)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of Finite Element Analysis in Implant Dentistry

Gültekin¹,

Gültekin²,

Yalçın³

2012

Finite Element Analysis - New Trends and Developments

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Implant failure without infection under these conditions is caused, in most cases, by excessive pressure on the bone-implant interface. [21][22][23] Loading with a counterclockwise rotational moment could induce excessive pressure on the bone/mini-implant interface, decreasing the stability of the implant. Therefore, it is recommended that a force system that produces a counterclockwise moment on mini-implants should be avoided.…”

Section: Stability Of Mini-implant With Lever-arm Structurementioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the effect of force direction on stationary anchorage success of mini-implant with a lever-arm–shaped upper structure

Park

Lee²,

Shin

et al. 2011

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare the effect of clockwise and counterclockwise torque on the primary stability of a mini-implant with a lever-arm-shaped upper structure. Materials and Methods: Twenty-four white rabbits were used for this study. Two screw-type miniimplants were placed in each tibia. In all, 96 screws were inserted. Two weeks later, a 2-N force was applied to the mini-implants without an upper structure in eight rabbits (control group). The mini-implants of the other 16 rabbits were loaded with an upper structure (experimental group). In the experimental group, the two left mini-implants were loaded in a clockwise direction (CW group) and the two right implants were loaded in a counterclockwise direction (CCW group). The rabbits were sacrificed at 1 week or 8 weeks after loading in both control and experimental groups. The removal torque value (RTV) was measured in 15 of 16 mini-implants in each group and the remaining implant was processed for histologic examination. Results: At 1 week there were no significant differences in the mean RTV between the control, CW, and CCW groups. At 8 weeks, the RTV was higher in the control and experimental groups than in the respective 1-week groups. At 8 weeks, there were no significant differences in the RTV between the control and CW groups, but the CCW group showed a lower RTV. Conclusions: CCW torque can decrease the stability of a mini-implant, whereas a CW torque has no effect. (Angle Orthod. 2011;81:776-782.)

show abstract

Bone loading pattern around implants in average and atrophic edentulous maxillae: a finite-element analysis

Cited by 68 publications

References 22 publications

A microstrain comparison of passively fitting screw-retained and cemented titanium frameworks

A microstrain comparison of passively fitting screw-retained and cemented titanium frameworks

Application of Finite Element Analysis in Implant Dentistry

Evaluation of the effect of force direction on stationary anchorage success of mini-implant with a lever-arm–shaped upper structure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About