Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2009.47.1.70

Three-dimensional finite element analysis on stress distribution of the mandibular implant-supported cantilever prostheses depending on the designs  

Ban, Jae-Hyurk (Department of Advanced Prosthodontics, Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry, Korea University)
Shin, Sang-Wan (Department of Advanced Prosthodontics, Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry, Korea University)
Kim, Sun-Jong (Department of Advanced Prosthodontics, Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry, Korea University)
Lee, Jeong-Yeol (Department of Advanced Prosthodontics, Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry, Korea University)
Publication Information
The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics / v.47, no.1, 2009 , pp. 70-81 More about this Journal
Abstract
Statement of problem: The position and length of cantilever influence on the stress distribution of implants, superstructure and bone. In edentulous mandible, implant-supported cantilever prostheses that based 4 or 6 implants between mental foramens has been attempted. Excessive bite force loaded at cantilever prosthesis causes bone resorption and breakage of superstructure prosthesis around posterior implants. To complement the cantilever length of conventional prosthesis, In 1992, (McCartney) introduced "cantilever-rest-implant" and Malo reported "All-on-Four" in 2003. Purpose: Analyze and compare the stress distribution of conventional cantilever prostheses with rest implant and All-on-$Four^{TM}$ implant prostheses. Material and method: The external loads(300 N vertically, 75 N horizontally) are applied to first molar area. The stress value, stress distribution and aspect of stress dispersion are analyzed by three-dimensional finite element analysis program, ANSYS ver. 10.0. Results: 1. The rest implant and "All-on-Four" implant system are superior to conventional cantilever prostheses to reduce stress on the bone and the superstructure around implants. 2. The rest implant was of the greatest advantage to stress distribution on bone, implant and superstructure. 3. With same number of implants, distally tilted implants are preferred to conventional cantilever prostheses for reducing the length of cantilever.
Keywords
Three-dimensional FEA; Rest implant; All-on-Four; Stress distribution;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Weinberg LA, Kruger B. Biomechanical considerations when combining tooth-supported and implant-supported prostheses. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1994;78:22-7   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Rangert B, Jemt T, Jorneus L. Forces and moments on B°ranemark implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1989;4:241-7   PUBMED
3 Malo P, Rangert B, Nobre M. 'All-on-Four' immediate-function concept with Branemark System implants for completely edentulous mandibles: a retrospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003;5:2-9   DOI   ScienceOn
4 De Boever JA, McCall WD Jr, Holden S, Ash MM Jr. FFunctional occlusal forces: an investigation by telemetry. J Prosthet Dent 1978;40:326-33   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Clelland NL, Ismail YH, Zaki HS, Pipko D. Three-dimensional finite element stress analysis in and around the Screw-Vent implant. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:391-8   PUBMED
6 Lee DO, Chung CH, Cho KZ. A study on the three dimensional finite element analysis of the stresses according to the curvature of arch and placement of implants. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 1995;33:98-129   과학기술학회마을   ScienceOn
7 Khatami AH, Smith CR. 'All-on-Four' immediate function concept and clinical report of treatment of an edentulous mandible with a fixed complete denture and milled titanium framework. J Prosthodont 2008;17:47-51   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
8 Misch CM, Ismail YH. Finite element stress analysis of tooth-to-implant fixed partial denture designs. J Prosthodont 1993;2:83-92   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Haraldson T, Carlsson GE. Bite force and oral function in patients with osseointegrated oral implants. Scand J Dent Res 1977;85:200-8   DOI   PUBMED
10 Lindquist LW, Rockler B, Carlsson GE. Bone resorption around fixtures in edentulous patients treated with mandibular fixed tissue-integrated prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 1988;59:59-63   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Lewinstein I, Banks-Sills L, Eliasi R. Finite element analysis of a new system (IL) for supporting an implant-retained cantilever prosthesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:355-66   PUBMED   ScienceOn
12 Benzing UR, Gall H, Weber H. Biomechanical aspects of two different implant-prosthetic concepts for edentulous maxillae. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:188-98   PUBMED
13 Rieger MR, Fareed K, Adams WK, Tanquist RA. Bone stress distribution for three endosseous implants. J Prosthet Dent 1989;61:223-8   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Brunski JB, Moccia AF Jr, Pollack SR, Korostoff E, Trachtenberg DI. The influence of functional use of endosseous dental implants on the tissue-implant interface. I. Histological aspects. J Dent Res 1979;58:1953-69   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
15 Holmes DC, Grigsby WR, Goel VK, Keller JC. Comparison of stress transmission in the IMZ implant sys-tem with polyoxymethylene or titanium intramobile element: a finite element stress analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992;7:450-8   PUBMED
16 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   DOI   PUBMED
17 Cho C, Shin SW, Kwon JJ. Three dimensional finite element analysis on the mandibular cantilevered prosthesis supported by implants. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2000;38:724-43   과학기술학회마을   ScienceOn
18 Davis DM, Zarb GA, Chao YL. Studies on frameworks for osseointegrated prostheses: Part 1. The effect of varying the number of supporting abutments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988;3:197-201   PUBMED
19 Burr DB, Martin RB, Schaffler MB, Radin EL. Bone remodeling in response to in vivo fatigue microdamage. J Biomech 1985;18:189-200   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Branemark PI, Adell R, Breine U, Hansson BO, Lindstrom J, Ohlsson A. Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses. I. Experimental studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1969;3:81-100   DOI   PUBMED
21 Byun SK, Park WH, Lee YS. Three dimensional finite element stress analysis of five different taper design implant systems J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2006;44:584-93   과학기술학회마을   ScienceOn
22 Jemt T, Lekholm U, Adell R. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of partially edentulous patients: a preliminary study on 876 consecutively placed fixtures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1989;4:211-7   PUBMED
23 Van Rossen IP, Braak LH, de Putter C, de Groot K. Stressabsorbing elements in dental implants. J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:198-205   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Siegele D, Soltesz U. Numerical investigations of the influence of implant shape on stress distribution in the jaw bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1989;4:333-40   PUBMED
25 McCartney JW. Cantilever rests: an alternative to the unsupported distal cantilever of osseointegrated implant-supported prostheses for the edentulous mandible. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:817-9   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
26 Van Zyl PP, Grundling NL, Jooste CH, Terblanche E. Three-dimensional finite element model of a human mandible incorporating six osseointegrated implants for stress analysis of mandibular cantilever prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:51-7   PUBMED   ScienceOn
27 Mathews MF, Breeding LC, Dixon DL, Aquilino SA. The effect of connector design on cement retention in an implant and natural tooth-supported fixed partial denture. J Prosthet Dent 1991;65:822-7   DOI   ScienceOn
28 Jang BS, Kim CW, Kim YS. A three dimensional finite element stress analysis of osseointegrated prosthesis according to the location and length of cantilever. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 1996;34:501-32   과학기술학회마을   ScienceOn
29 Cook SD, Weinstein AM, Klawitter JJ. A three-dimensional finite element analysis of a porous rooted Co-Cr-Mo alloy dental implant. J Dent Res 1982;61:25-9   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
30 Lim JK. Accuracy estimation and control methods of finite element solutions. Trans KSME 1994;34:502-9   과학기술학회마을
31 White SN, Caputo AA, Anderkvist T. Effect of cantilever length on stress transfer by implant-supported prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 1994;71:493-9   DOI   ScienceOn
32 Malo P, Rangert B, Nobre M. All-on-4 immediate-function concept with Branemark System implants for completely edentulous maxillae: a 1-year retrospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005;7:S88-94   DOI   PUBMED
33 Richter EJ. Basic biomechanics of dental implants in prosthetic dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 1989;61:602-9   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
34 Sertgoz A. Finite element analysis study of the effect of superstructure material on stress distribution in an implantsupported fixed prosthesis. Int J Prosthodont 1997;10:19-27   PUBMED   ScienceOn
35 Branemark PI. Osseointegration and its experimental background. J Prosthet Dent 1983;50:399-410   DOI   ScienceOn
36 Zarb GA, Schmitt A. The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated dental implants: the Toronto study. Part III: Problems and complications encountered. J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:185-94   DOI   ScienceOn
37 Francetti L, Agliardi E, Testori T, Romeo D, Taschieri S, Fabbro MD. Immediate rehabilitation of the mandible with fixed full prosthesis supported by axial and tilted implants: interim results of a single cohort prospective study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2008;10:255-63   DOI   PUBMED
38 Testori T, Del Fabbro M, Capelli M, Zuffetti F, Francetti L, Weinstein RL. Immediate occlusal loading and tilted implants for the rehabilitation of the atrophic edentulous maxilla: 1-year interim results of a multicenter prospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008;19:227-32   DOI   ScienceOn
39 Clelland NL, Ismail YH, Zaki HS, Pipko D. Three-dimensional finite element stress analysis in and around the Screw-Vent implant. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6:391-8   PUBMED
40 Kim DW, Kim YS. A study on the osseointegrated prostesis using three dimensional finite element method. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 1991;29:167-213
41 Rieger MR, Adams WK, Kinzel GL. A finite element survey of eleven endosseous implants. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:457-65   DOI   ScienceOn
42 Van Steenberghe D. A retrospective multicenter evaluation of the survival rate of osseointegrated fixtures supporting fixed partial prostheses in the treatment of partial edentulism. J Prosthet Dent 1989;61:217-23   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
43 Branemark PI. Osseointegration and its experimental background. J Prosthet Dent 1983;50:399-410   DOI   ScienceOn
44 Bergman B. Evaluation of the results of treatment with osseointegrated implants by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. J Prosthet Dent 1983;50:114-5   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
45 Borchers L, Reichart P. Three-dimensional stress distribution around a dental implant at different stages of interface development. J Dent Res 1983;62:155-9   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
46 Skalak R. Biomechanical considerations in osseointegrated prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 1983;49:843-8   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
47 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   PUBMED
48 Ericsson I, Lekholm U, Branemark PI, Lindhe J, Glantz PO, Nyman S.A clinical evaluation of fixed-bridge restorations supported by the combination of teeth and osseointegrated titanium implants. J Clin Periodontol 1986;13:307-12   DOI   PUBMED