Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the retention of fixed partial dentures

Abstract

Four three-dimensional mathematical models were generated, each representing a three-unit fixed partial denture. The second premolar and second molar were used as abutments. Different associations of dental support preparation were tested. A 500-N axial load was applied to the pontic. Strains were analysed for each dental support by means of a three-dimensional finite element analysis technique. The results showed that the greatest strains were observed on the weaker abutment, the premolar. The cervical margin facing the edentulous area is affected most, regardless of the model or the dental support. The greater the dento-prosthetic differential surface between the two dental supports (thus the greater the retention differential) the higher the risk of unsealing.

Effects of Differing Thickness and Mechanical Properties of Cement on the Stress Levels and Distributions in a Three‐Unit Zirconia Fixed Prosthesis by FEA

“…As a consequence, when the objective is to minimize the stresses in the framework, a cement gap as small as possible should be strived for. With higher maximum principal stress in the framework, crack growth in ceramics might be affected positively, together with the increasing incidence of chipping of the veneering material . The results concerning thicker cement layers being unfavorable for the performance of the restoration are in accordance with previous mechanical laboratory investigations .…”

“…Most authors based the load values on intraoral bite forces, which show a wide range in the literature . For their FEA of three‐unit FDPs, Eraslan et al and Farah et al applied a load of 100 N, Augereau used a load of 500 N, and Möllers et al 600 N to the pontic. Dittmer et al even distributed a load of 1630 N over two circular areas in their four‐unit zirconia FDP.…”

Axial-wall inclination angle and vertical height interactions in molar full crown preparations

“…[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] This theory suggests that singlewall inclination angles of 2-48 are ideal and 5-148 are acceptable. [2][3][4][5][6]15 However, in clinical practice, angles of around 158 have been observed to be successful.…”

“…The resistance form of restorations has been widely investigated in clinical outcomes studies of restoration failure, 2,3 in vitro models, [4][5][6][7][8][9]17 mathematical modeling with theoretical calculations 10,11 and finite element analyses. [12][13][14] A review of fixed prosthodontic tooth preparation factors looked at the interaction of these factors, i.e., vertical wall Inclination, height and base width, etc. resulting in clinical guidelines for minimum standards.…”

Influence of abutment model materials on the fracture loads of three-unit fixed dental prostheses

“…However, there is a great variety of testing conditions. Extracted natural teeth can be used to simulate the abutments as closely as possible to the oral conditions with regard to the elastic modulus, the bonding characteristics and mechanical stability [1][2][3][4][5] . However, human teeth are rare and a sufficient number of specimens is essential to achieve appropriate statistical power.…”