Finite Element Stress Analysis according to Apical-coronal Implant Position

  • Kang, Tae-Ho (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oral Biology Research Institute, College of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Kim, Su-Gwan (Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oral Biology Research Institute, College of Dentistry, Chosun University)
  • 발행 : 2006.02.28

초록

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of apical-coronal implant position on the stress distribution after occlusal and oblique loading. Materials and Methods: The cortical and cancellous bone was assumed to be isotropic, homogeneous, and linearly elastic. The implant was apposed to cortical bone in the crestal region and to cancellous bone for the remainder of the implant-bone interface. The cancellous core was surrounded by 2-mm-thick cortical bone. An axial load of 200 N was assumed and a 200-N oblique load was applied at a buccal inclination of 30 degrees to the center of the pontic and buccal cusps. The 3-D geometry modeled in Iron CAD was interfaced with ANSYS. Results: When only the stress in the bone was compared, the minimal principal stress at load Points A and B, with a axial load applied at 90 degrees or an oblique load applied at 30 degrees, for model 5. The von Mises stress in the screw of model 5 was minimal at Points A and B, for 90- and 30-degree loads. When the von Mises stress of the abutment screw was compared at Points A and B, and a 30-degree oblique load, the maximum principal stress was seen with model 2, while the minimum principal stress was with model 5. In the case of implant, the model that received maximum von Mises stress was model 1 with the load Point A and Point B, axial load applied in 90-degree, and oblique load applied in 30-degree. Discussion and Conclusions: These results suggests that implantation should be done at the supracrestal level only when necessary, since it results in higher stress than when implantation is done at or below the alveolar bone level. Within the limited this study, we recommend the use of supracrestal apical-coronal positioning in the case of clinical indications.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Akca K, Iplikcioglu H: Finite element stress analysis of the influence of staggered versus straight placement of dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2001;16:722-730
  2. Cooper LF, Masuda T, Yliheikkila PK, Felton DA: Generalizations regarding the process and phenomenon of osseointegration. Part II. In vitro studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:163-174
  3. Masuda T, Yliheikkila PK, Felton DA, Cooper LF: Generalizations regarding the process and phenomenon of osseointegration. Part I. In vivo studies. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:17-29
  4. Quirynen M, Naert I, van Steenberghe D: Fixture design and overload influence marginal bone loss and fixture success in the Branemark system. Clin Oral Implants Res 1992;3:104-111 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1992.030302.x
  5. Ciftci Y, Canay S: The effect of veneering materials on stress distribution in implant-supported fixed prosthetic restorations. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:571-582
  6. Boioli LT, Penaud J, Miller N: A meta-analytic, quantitative assessment of osseointegration establishment and evolution of submerged and non-submerged endosseous titanium oral implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:579-588 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.120605.x
  7. Davarpanah M, Martinez H, Tecucianu JF: Apical-coronal implant position: recent surgical proposals. Technical note. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:865-872
  8. Williams KR, Watson CJ, Murphy WM, Scott J, Gregory M, Sinobad D: Finite element analysis of fixed prostheses attached to osseointegrated implants. Quintessence Int 1990;21:563-570
  9. Kregzde M: A method of selecting the best implant prosthesis design option using three-dimensional finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993;8:662-673
  10. Meijer HJ, Starmans FJ, Steen WH, Bosman F: A three-dimensional, finite-element analysis of bone around dental implants in an edentulous human mandible. Arch Oral Biol 1993;38:491-496 https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9969(93)90185-O
  11. van Zyl PP, Grundling NL, Jooste CH, Terblanche E: Threedimensional finite element model of a human mandible incorporating six osseointegrated implants for stress analysis of mandibular cantilever prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:51-57
  12. Holmgren EP, Seckinger RJ, Kilgren LM, Mante F: Evaluating parameters of osseointegrated dental implants using finite element analysis--a two-dimensional comparative study examining the effects of implant diameter, implant shape, and load direction. J Oral Implantol 1998; 24:80-88 https://doi.org/10.1563/1548-1336(1998)024<0080:EPOODI>2.3.CO;2
  13. Geng JP, Tan KB, Liu GR: Application of finite element analysis in implant dentistry: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2001;85:585-598 https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.115251
  14. Akca K, Iplikcioglu H: Evaluation of the effect of the residual bone angulation on implant-supported fixed prosthesis in mandibular posterior edentulism. Part II: 3-D finite element stress analysis. Implant Dent 2001;10:238-245 https://doi.org/10.1097/00008505-200110000-00006
  15. De Leonardis D, Garg AK, Pecora GE: Osseointegration of rough acid-etched titanium implants: 5-year follow-up of 100 minimatic implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:384-391
  16. Lai H, Zhang F, Zhang B, Yang C, Xue M: Influence of percentage of osseointegration on stress distribution around dental implants. Chin J Dent Res 1998;1:7-11
  17. Martinez H, Davarpanah M, Missika. Implant treatment for the posterior regions: classification. In: Davarpanah M, Martinez H, Kebir M, Tecucianu JF (eds). Clinical Manual of Implant Dentistry. Chicago: Quintessence, 2003:156
  18. Mericske-Stern R, Assal P, Mericske E, Burgin W: Occlusal force and oral tactile sensibility measured in partially edentulous patients with ITI implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:345-353
  19. O'Mahony AM, Williams JL, Spencer P: Anisotropic elasticity of cortical and cancellous bone in the posterior mandible increases peri-implant stress and strain under oblique loading. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:648-657 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.120614.x