Influence of parafunctional loading and prosthetic connection on stress distribution: A 3D finite element analysis

Abstract

Internal connection implants presented the most favorable biomechanical situation, whereas the least favorable situation was the biomechanical behavior of external connection implants. Parafunctional loading increased the magnitude of stress by 3 to 4 times.

Effect of different types of prosthetic platforms on stress-distribution in dental implant-supported prostheses

“…The third null hypothesis (that the Morse taper implants would show the same biomechanical efficiency as the external hexagonal implants) was rejected because the Morse taper implants showed better stress distribution in the cortical bone. These results are consistent with recently published studies, which have indicated the best biomechanical profile for this type of connection [4,16,34]. However, unlike previous studies that evaluated only bone tissue [16], this study indicated a significant increase in stresses among the abutments of the Morse taper implants.…”

“…However, unlike previous studies that evaluated only bone tissue [16], this study indicated a significant increase in stresses among the abutments of the Morse taper implants. These results can be justified by the geometry of the Morse taper implants (an internal connection), which leads to the centralization of stresses along the axis of the implant itself and adequate stability [4,34,35]. Therefore, it causes an increase in stresses in the abutment-implant interface and a reduction of the magnitude of tensions in the cortical bone, as demonstrated in this study.…”

“…Qualitative (maps of stress concentration) and quantitative analyses were used in this research [4,16,31]. Stress concentration indicates a specific area in which stress is increased and concentrated compared to other specific regions being analyzed.…”

“…Maximum principal stress (MPS; measured in MPa) and microstrain (measured in "strain": μm/m, usually designed as με, and usually shown as "microstrain") were used for the bone tissue [16]. The data from the maps (i.e., the points with maximum stress) were organized in an Excel table (Microsoft Office Excel, Redmond, WA, USA) and were submitted to SigmaPlot software version 12.0 (SigmaPlot, San Jose, CA, USA) to be analyzed for normal distribution (Shapiro-Wilk test and equal variance) [4,16,31]. Subsequently, the diameter of the implant was studied using two-way analysis of variance (factors: diameter and implant region), under oblique and axial loadings.…”

“…Current research seeks to determine connections that can distribute stresses more efficiently in the bone tissue and structures linked to the implant-supported prosthesis. [4,5]; peri-implant bone preservation is also a point of extensive discussion [2,3].…”