The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

  • 제3권1호
  • /
  • Pages.1-9
  • /
  • 2011
  • /
  • 2005-7806(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-7814(eISSN)
대한치과보철학회 (The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Strain of implants depending on occlusion types in mandibular implant-supported fixed prostheses

  • Sohn, Byoung-Sup (Department of Prosthodontics and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University Dental Hospital, School of Dentistry,Seoul National University) ;
  • Heo, Seong-Joo (Department of Prosthodontics and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University Dental Hospital, School of Dentistry,Seoul National University) ;
  • Koak, Jai-Young (Department of Prosthodontics and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University Dental Hospital, School of Dentistry,Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Seong-Kyun (Department of Prosthodontics and Dental Research Institute, Seoul National University Dental Hospital, School of Dentistry,Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Su-Young (Department of Prosthodontics & Dental Research Institute, School of Dentistry,Seoul National University)
  • 투고 : 2011.01.10
  • 심사 : 2011.01.24
  • 발행 : 2011.03.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

PURPOSE. This study investigated the strain of implants using a chewing simulator with strain gauges in mandibular implant-supported fixed prostheses under various dynamic loads. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Three implant-supported 5-unit fixed prostheses were fabricated with three different occlusion types (Group I: Canine protected occlusion, Group II: Unilaterally balanced occlusion, Group III: Bilaterally balanced occlusion). Two strain gauges were attached to each implant abutment. The programmed dynamic loads (0 - 300 N) were applied using a chewing simulator (MTS 858 Mini Bionix II systems, MTS systems corp., Minn, USA) and the strains were monitored. The statistical analyses were performed using the paired t-test and the ANOVA. RESULTS. The mean strain values (MSV) for the working sides were 151.83 ${\mu}{\varepsilon}$, 176.23 ${\mu}{\varepsilon}$, and 131.07 ${\mu}{\varepsilon}$ for Group I, Group II, and Group III, respectively. There was a significant difference between Group II and Group III (P < .05). Also, the MSV for non-working side were 58.29 ${\mu}{\varepsilon}$, 72.64 ${\mu}{\varepsilon}$, and 98.93 ${\mu}{\varepsilon}$ for Group I, Group II, and Group III, respectively. One was significantly different from the others with a 95% confidence interval (P < .05). CONCLUSION. The MSV for the working side of Groups I and II were significantly different from that for the non-working side (Group I: t = 7.58, Group II: t = 6.25). The MSV for the working side of Group II showed significantly larger than that of Group III (P < .01). Lastly, the MSV for the non-working side of Group III showed significantly larger than those of Group I or Group II (P < .01).

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Adell R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U, Branemark PI, Jemt T. Longterm follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5:347-59.
  2. Branemark PI, Zarb GA, Albrektsson T, eds. Tissue Integrated. Prostheses: In: osseointegration in clinical dentistry. Chicago; Quintessence; 1985. p. 175-86.
  3. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Branemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981;10:387-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-9785(81)80077-4
  4. Esposito M, Hirsch JM, Lekholm U, Thomsen P. Biological factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants. (II). Etiopathogenesis. Eur J Oral Sci 1998;106:721-64. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0909-8836..t01-6-.x
  5. Kohavi D. Complications in the tissue integrated prostheses components: clinical and mechanical evaluation. J Oral Rehabil 1993;20:413-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1993.tb01625.x
  6. Taylor TD, Agar JR, Vogiatzi T. Implant prosthodontics: current perspective and future directions. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:66-75.
  7. Chapman RJ. Principles of occlusion for implant prostheses: guidelines for position, timing, and force of occlusal contacts. Quintessence Int 1989;20:473-80.
  8. Ashman RB, Van Buskirk WC. The elastic properties of a human mandible. Adv Dent Res 1987;1:64-7. https://doi.org/10.1177/08959374870010011401
  9. Geng JP, Tan KB, Liu GR. Application of finite element analysis in implant dentistry: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2001;85:585-98. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.115251
  10. Gibbs CH, Mahan PE, Lundeen HC, Brehnan K, Walsh EK, Holbrook WB. Occlusal forces during chewing and swallowing as measured by sound transmission. J Prosthet Dent 1981;46:443-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(81)90455-8
  11. Bidez MW, Misch CE. Force transfer in implant dentistry: basic concepts and principles. J Oral Implantol 1992;18:264-74.
  12. Stanford CM, Brand RA. Toward an understanding of implant occlusion and strain adaptive bone modeling and remodeling. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:553-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(99)70209-X
  13. Roberts WE. Fundamental principles of bone physiology, metabolism and loading. In: Naert I, van Steenberghe D, Worthington P, editors: Osseointegration in oral rehabilitation: an introductory textbook. London; Quintessence; 1993. p. 163-4.
  14. Duyck J, Ronold HJ, Van Oosterwyck H, Naert I, Vander Sloten J, Ellingsen JE. The influence of static and dynamic loading on marginal bone reactions around osseointegrated implants: an animal experimental study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2001;12:207-18. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.2001.012003207.x
  15. 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;3:104-11. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1992.030302.x
  16. Horshaw SJ, Brunski JB, Cochran GV. Mechanical loading of Branemark implants affects interfacial bone modelling and remodelling. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1994;9:345-60.
  17. Frost HM. Wolff's Law and bone's structural adaptations to mechanical usage: an overview for clinicians. Angle Orthod 1994; 64:175-88.
  18. Pilliar RM, Deporter DA, Watson PA, Valiquette N. Dental implant design-effect on bone remodeling. J Biomed Mater Res 1991;25:467-83. https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.820250405
  19. Buser D, Nydegger T, Hirt HP, Cochran DL, Nolte LP. Removal torque values of titanium implants in the maxilla of miniature pigs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:611-9.
  20. Hebel KS, Gajjar RC. Cement-retained versus screw-retained implant restorations: achieving optimal occlusion and esthetics in implant dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77:28-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(97)70203-8
  21. Mericske-Stern R, Venetz E, Fahrla¨nder F, Bu¨rgin W. In vivo force measurements on maxillary implants supporting a fixed prosthesis or an overdenture: a pilot study. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84: 535-47. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2000.110264
  22. Bergendal T, Engquist B. Implant-supported overdentures: a longitudinal prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998;13:253-62.
  23. Lekholm U, Gunne J, Henry P, Higuchi K, Linde′n U, Bergstrom C, van Steenberghe D. Survival of the Branemark implant in partially edentulous jaws: a 10-year prospective multicenter study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:639-45.
  24. Skalak R. Biomechanical considerations in osseointegrated prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 1983;49:843-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(83)90361-X
  25. Davis DM, Rimrott R, Zarb GA. Studies on frameworks for osseointegrated prostheses: Part 2. The effect of adding acrylic resin or porcelain to form the occlusal superstructure. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988;3:275-80.
  26. Gracis SE, Nicholls JI, Chalupnik JD, Yuodelis RA. Shock absorbing behavior of five restorative materials used on implants. Int J Prosthodont 1991;4:282-91.
  27. Cibirka RM, Razzoog ME, Lang BR, Stohler CS. Determining the force absorption quotient for restorative materials used in implant occlusal surfaces. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67:361-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90247-8
  28. Hobkirk JA, Psarros KJ. The influence of occlusal surface material on peak masticatory forces using osseointegrated implant- supported prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992;7:345-52.
  29. Sertgoz A. Finite element analysis study of the effect of superstructure material on stress distribution in an implant-supported fixed prosthesis. Int J Prosthodont 1997;10:19-27.
  30. Brunski JB, Puleo DA, Nanci A. Biomaterials and biomechanics of oral and maxillofacial implants: current status and future developments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:15-46.
  31. Glantz PO, Rangert B, Svensson A, Stafford GD, Arnvidarson B, Randow K, Linden U, Hulte′n J. On clinical loading of osseointegrated implants. A methodological and clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res 1993;4:99-105. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1993.040206.x
  32. Smedberg JI, Nilner K, Rangert B, Svensson SA, Glantz SA. On the influence of superstructure connection on implant preload: a methodological and clinical study. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996;7:55-63. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070107.x
  33. Keaveny TM, Guo XE, Wachtel EF, McMahon TA, Hayes WC. Trabecular bone exhibits fully linear elastic behavior and yields at low strains. J Biomech 1994;27:1127-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(94)90053-1
  34. Heckmann SM, Karl M, Wichmann MG, Winter W, Graef F, Taylor TD. Cement fixation and screw retention: parameters of passive fit. An in vitro study of three-unit implant-supported fixed partial dentures. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:466-73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2004.01027.x
  35. Karl M, Winter W, Taylor TD, Heckmann SM. In vitro study on passive fit in implant-supported 5-unit fixed partial dentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004;19:30-7.
  36. Curtis DA, Curtis TA, Wagnild GW, Finzen FC. Incidence of various classes of removable partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67:664-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90167-9
  37. Helkimo E, Carlsson GE, Helkimo M. Bite force and state of dentition. Acta Odontol Scand 1977;35:297-303. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357709064128
  38. van Eijden TM. Three-dimensional analyses of human bite-force magnitude and moment. Arch Oral Biol 1991;36:535-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9969(91)90148-N
  39. Gibbs CH, Mahan PE, Mauderli A, Lundeen HC, Walsh EK. Limits of human bite strength. J Prosthet Dent 1986;56:226-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(86)90480-4
  40. Haraldson T, Karlsson U, Carlsson GE. Bite force and oral function in complete denture wearers. J Oral Rehabil 1979;6:41-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1979.tb00403.x
  41. Haraldson T, Carlsson GE, Ingervall B. Functional state, bite force and postural muscle activity in patients with osseointegrated oral implant bridges. Acta Odontol Scand 1979;37:195-206. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357909027582
  42. Mericske-Stern R, Zarb GA. In vivo measurements of some functional aspects with mandibular fixed prostheses supported by implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1996;7:153-61. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0501.1996.070209.x

피인용 문헌

  1. Finite element modeling technique for predicting mechanical behaviors on mandible bone during mastication vol.4, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2012.4.4.218
  2. Development of implant loading device for animal study about various loading protocol: a pilot study vol.4, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2012.4.4.227
  3. A novel bio-sensor for registration of biting force in occlusally reactive single mandibular implant overdenture vol.03, pp.07, 2013, https://doi.org/10.4236/ojst.2013.37063
  4. Oclusión terapéutica. Desde las escuelas de oclusión a la Odontología Basada en Evidencia vol.6, pp.2, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0718-5391(13)70129-0
  5. COMPARATIVE STRESS ANALYSIS OF LINGUALIZED AND CONVENTIONAL BALANCED OCCLUSION SCHEMES IN A FULL-ARCH FIXED IMPLANT PROSTHESIS USING FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS vol.17, pp.04, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219519417500749
  6. Evaluation of the Cortical Deformation Induced by Distal Cantilevers Supported by Extra-Short Implants: A Finite Elements Analysis Study vol.10, pp.12, 2011, https://doi.org/10.3390/sym10120762
  7. Occlusal overload with dental implants: a review vol.5, pp.None, 2011, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0180-8