Stress distribution in fixed-partial prosthesis and peri-implant bone tissue with different framework materials and vertical misfit levels: a three-dimensional finite element analysis

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of superstructure material and vertical misfits on the stresses created in an implant-supported partial prosthesis. A three-dimensional (3-D) finite element model was prepared based on common clinical data. The posterior part of a severely resorbed jaw with two osseointegrated implants at the second premolar and second molar regions was modeled using specific modeling software (SolidWorks 2010). Finite element models were created by importing the solid model into mechanical simulation software (ANSYS Workbench 11). The models were divided into groups according to the prosthesis framework material (type IV gold alloy, silver-palladium alloy, commercially pure titanium, cobalt-chromium alloy, or zirconia) and vertical misfit level (10 µm, 50 µm, and 100 µm) created at one implant-prosthesis interface. The gap of the vertical misfit was set to be closed and the stress values were measured in the framework, porcelain veneer, retention screw, and bone tissue. Stiffer materials led to higher stress concentration in the framework and increased stress values in the retention screw, while in the same circumstances, the porcelain veneer showed lower stress values, and there was no significant difference in stress in the peri-implant bone tissue. A considerable increase in stress concentration was observed in all the structures evaluated within the misfit amplification. The framework material influenced the stress concentration in the prosthetic structures and retention screw, but not that in bone tissue. All the structures were significantly influenced by the increase in the misfit levels. (J Oral Sci 55, 239-244, 2013)

Implant Inclination and Horizontal Misfit in Metallic Bar Framework of Overdentures: Analysis By 3D-FEA Method

“…Misfit has been characterized as responsible to provide contact asymmetry between the prosthetic components, causing increased tension in the retaining system components and supporting bone tissue (20). The current study has shown that the increase of the horizontal misfit is directly related to the stress increase generated across the entire system (bar framework, prosthetic screw, implant and alveolar bone tissue), which is in agreement with a previous study (21).…”

Stress Distribution of Dental Implants in Lateral or Canine Areas: A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis

“…Preservation of esthetics and restoration of lost tissues has long been the main purpose of dentistry 1 . The invention of osseointegrated dental implants has increased the usability of prosthetic applications in edentulous patients 2 . Today, overdentures supported by dental implants are the primary treatment modality of edentulous patients 3 .…”

“…Today, overdentures supported by dental implants are the primary treatment modality of edentulous patients 3 . Overdentures provide adequate denture stability and retention and improve patients' quality of life, leading to higher denture satisfaction, including better function, speech, and comfort 2,4,5 . In the case of insufficient bone quantity, overdentures with attachment systems over two implants inserted in the inter-foraminal region are the best treatment method to increase prosthetic stabilization in the atrophic mandible 3,6 .…”

Effect of Material Type on the Stress Distribution in Posterior Three-Unit Fixed Dental Prosthesis: A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis

“…(4) For many years, metal-ceramic restorations are considered the gold standard in the prosthetic field because of their predictable structural performance, versatility, and low cost. (5) Despite the success of metal-ceramic restorations, zirconia-ceramic restorations have been introduced as an alternative option to metalceramics inposterior three-unit (FDPs) because of their excellent biocompatibility, superior mechanical properties and enhanced esthetics; (6)(7)(8) however, fracture of the framework especially in the connector area and chipping of the veneering ceramic are considered the main drawback of these restorations. (9,10) In contrast to ceramics, BioHPP; (bioactive high performance polymer containing 20% ceramic fillers) based on polyetheretherketone (PEEK) has been introduced in dentistry.…”