Prosthetic abutment influences bone biomechanical behavior of immediately loaded implants

Camargos, Germana de Villa; Sotto-Maior, Bruno Salles; Silva, Wander José da; Lazari, Priscilla Cardoso; Cury, Altair Antoninha Del Bel

doi:10.1590/1807-3107bor-2016.vol30.0065

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, UCLA abutments induced higher stress in crown screws than that induced by conical abutments. These results may be related to the segmented structure, which is capable to improve biomechanical behavior with the presence of two screwed connections in the conical abutment and increase the total area for stress/strain distribution and dissipation through the components (Camargos et al, 2016). These results are consistent with previous studies, which demonstrated that non-segmented abutments generate higher stress compared to segmented abutments (Ochiai et al, 2003;Aalaei et al, 2017).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Stress distribution in prosthetic abutments: a finite element analysis comparison of conical and UCLA abutments

Araújo

Miranda

Dini

et al. 2021

RSD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of prosthetic abutment type on single-screwed prostheses in posterior mandibular molar rehabilitations is not yet known. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the distribution of stresses in the crowns, prosthetic components, implant and bone in implant-supported restorations with or without a prosthetic abutment, maintaining an equal total height of the implant-crown set. Virtual 3-dimensional (3D) finite element models were constructed, the models were designed to represent a posterior single crown rehabilitation with a screwed retention system and external hexagon implants placed in the lower first molar region. Two rehabilitation methods were designed to simulate a monolithic zirconia crown screwed onto a conical abutment, which was screwed onto an external hexagon implant (M1); and a monolithic zirconia crown screwed directly onto the external hexagon implant using an UCLA abutment (M2). An axial load of 200 N was simulated and applied axially in the occlusal region of the restoration divided into 5 points. The quantitative and qualitative description of the maximum principal stress for crowns, von Mises stress for screws, conical abutment and implant; and minimal principal stress for cortical and medullary bone were evaluated. M1 presented similar stress distribution for crowns, cortical and medullary bone compared to M2. Conversely, the stress values were considerably higher for crowns screw and implants in the M2 group. In conclusion, single implant-supported rehabilitations of mandibular first molars using external hexagon implants presented better stress distribution on the crown screw and implants for the M1 group compared to M2.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Stress distribution in prosthetic abutments: a finite element analysis comparison of conical and UCLA abutments

Araújo

Miranda

Dini

et al. 2021

RSD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, their use should be considered only in certain specific and indicated cases. Moreover, some studies have reported that the castable abutments present unfavorable biomechanical behavior 42 …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Effect of Splinting of Tilted External Hexagon Implants on 3‐Unit Implant‐Supported Prostheses in the Posterior Maxilla: A 3D Finite Element Analysis

Almeida

Verri

Lemos

et al. 2022

Journal of Prosthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To assess the effects of tilted external hexagon implants and splinted restorations in terms of stress distribution on the bone tissue, implants, and prosthetic screws, using three-dimensional finite element analysis. Materials and Methods: Six models were used to simulate a posterior maxilla bone block (type IV) from the first premolar to the first molar. Each model included three 4.1-mm-diameter external hexagon implants with varying inclinations (0°, 17°, and 30°) and crown designs (splinted and nonsplinted restorations). The forces applied were as follows: 400 N axially (50 N for each slope of the cusp) and 200 N obliquely (45°only on the buccal slope of the cusp). Stress distribution on the implants and prosthetic screw was evaluated using Von Mises stress, while the maximum principal stress was used to evaluate the stress distribution in the bone tissue. Results:The oblique load increased the stress on all the structures in all the models. Increased inclination of the implants resulted in higher stress concentration in the bone tissue, implants, and prosthetic screws. However, splinted restorations contributed to reduction of the stress for the oblique loading, mainly in the bone tissue and prosthetic screw of the first molar, as the stress was shared between the first and second premolar restorations. Conclusions: Tilted implants increased proportionally the stress on bone tissue and prosthetic screws of models. Additionally, splinting restorations reduced the stress concentration area in the simulated bone tissue, implants, and prosthetic screws in the first molar, as the stress was shared with the adjacent implants.

show abstract

“…The high risk in the screw-retained prosthesis can be related to lower preload in the screw with displacement (penetration and gaps) higher and concentrated on the threads of the screw/or abutment when compared to cement-retained (15). This difference can be even greater when use a one-piece abutment for cemented prostheses (3), since the type of abutment can influence biomechanical behavior (18). Thus, to eliminate the possibility of bias, the same abutment (UCLA casting in Co-Cr) was considered for both retention systems.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retention System and Splinting on Morse Taper Implants in the Posterior Maxilla by 3D Finite Element Analysis

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to evaluate different retention systems (cement-or screw-retained) and crown designs (non-splinted or splinted) of fixed implant-supported restorations, in terms of stress distributions in implants/components and bone tissue, by 3-dimensional (3D) finite element analysis. Four 3D models were simulated with the InVesalius, Rhinoceros 3D, and SolidWorks programs. Models were made of type III bone from the posterior maxillary area. Models included three 4.0-mm-diameter Morse taper (MT) implants with different lengths, which supported metal-ceramic crowns. Models were processed by the Femap and NeiNastran programs, using an axial force of 400 N and oblique force of 200 N. Results were visualized as the von Mises stress and maximum principal stress (σ max ). Under axial loading, there was no difference in the distribution of stress in implants/components between retention systems and splinted crowns; however, in oblique loading, cemented prostheses showed better stress distribution than screwed prostheses, whereas splinted crowns tended to reduce stress in the implant of the first molar. In the bone tissue cemented prostheses showed better stress distribution in bone tissue than screwed prostheses under axial and oblique loading. The splinted design only had an effect in the screwed prosthesis, with no influence in the cemented prosthesis. Cemented prostheses on MT implants showed more favorable stress distributions in implants/components and bone tissue. Splinting was favorable for stress distribution only for screwed prostheses under oblique loading.

show abstract

Prosthetic abutment influences bone biomechanical behavior of immediately loaded implants

Cited by 12 publications

References 24 publications

Stress distribution in prosthetic abutments: a finite element analysis comparison of conical and UCLA abutments

Stress distribution in prosthetic abutments: a finite element analysis comparison of conical and UCLA abutments

Effect of Splinting of Tilted External Hexagon Implants on 3‐Unit Implant‐Supported Prostheses in the Posterior Maxilla: A 3D Finite Element Analysis

Retention System and Splinting on Morse Taper Implants in the Posterior Maxilla by 3D Finite Element Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About