Browse > Article

THE THREE DIMENSIONAL FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF THE STRESS DISTRIBUTION ACCORDING TO THE THREAD DESIGNS AND THE MARGINAL BONE LOSS OF THE IMPLANTS  

Kim, Il-Kyu (Dept. of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Inha University)
Son, Choong-Yul (Dept. of Naval Achi & Ocean Eng., Inha University)
Jang, Keum-Soo (Dept. of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Inha University)
Cho, Hyun-Young (Dept. of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Inha University)
Baek, Min-Kyu (Dept. of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Inha University)
Park, Sheung-Hoon (Dept. of Dentistry, College of Medicine, Inha University)
Publication Information
Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery / v.30, no.1, 2008 , pp. 60-71 More about this Journal
Abstract
The objective of this study is to evaluate the stress distribution according to the thread design and the marginal bone loss of a single unit dental implant under the axial and offset-axial loading by three dimensional finite element analysis. The implants used had the diameter of 5mm and 4mm with 13mm in length and prosthesis with a conical type which is 6mm in height and 12mm in diameter. The thread designs were triangular, square and buttress. In the three dimensional finite element model with $15\times15\times20mm$ hexahedron and 2mm cortical thickness, implants were placed with crown to root ratio 7:12, 10:9, 13:6 and 16:3. And additionally the axial force of 100N were applied into 0mm, 2mm and 4mm away from the center of the implants. The results were as follows 1. The maximum von-Mises stress in cortical bone was concentrated to cervical area of implant, and in cancellous bone, apical portion. 2. Comparing the von-Mises stresses in cortical bone of 2mm and 4mm offset loading with central axial loading, it were increased to 3 and 5 times in diameter 4mm implant, and 2 and 4 times, in diameter 5mm implant. 3. The square threads were more effective than the triangular and butress as the longer diameter, the offset loading, and the worse crown to root ratio. 4. The von-Mises stresses were relatively stable until crown to root ratio 13:6, but it was suddenly increased at 16:3. From the results of this study, minimum requirement of crown to root ratio of implant is 2:1, and in the respect of crown to root ratio, diameter and offset loading, square threads are more effective than triangular and buttress threads.
Keywords
Implant; Thread; Crown to root ratio; Finite element analysis;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Branemark PI : Osseointegration and its experimental background. J Prosthet Dent 50 : 399, 1983   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Reiger MR : Loading considerations for implants. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am 3(4) : 795, 1991
3 Brunski JB : Biomaterials and Biomechanics in Dental Implant Design. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 3 : 85, 1988   PUBMED
4 Misch C : Contemporary Implant Dentistry, 2nd ed. St Louis, Mosby, 1999, p.21
5 Lindquist LW, Rockler B, Carlsson GE : Bone resorption around fixtures in edentulous patients treated with mandibular fixed tissue-integrated prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 59 : 59, 1988   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Patra AK, DePaolo JM, D'souza KS et al : Guidelines for analysis and redesign of dental implants. Implant Dent 7 : 355, 1998   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
7 Akagawa Y, Sato Y, Teixeira ER. et al : A mimic osseointegrated implant model for three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Oral Rehab 30 : 41, 2003   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Branemark PI : Osseointegration and its experimental background. J Prosthet Dent 50 : 399, 1983   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Cowin SC, Lanyon LE, Rodan G : Functional adaptation in bone tissue. Calc Tiss Intl 36 : 155, 1984   DOI
10 Penny RE, Kraal JH : Crown-to-root ratio: Its significance in restorative dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 42 : 34, 1979   DOI   ScienceOn
11 O'Mahony A, Bowles Q, Woolsey G et al : Stress distribution in the single-unit osseointegrated dental implant: Finite element analyses of axial and off-axial loading. Implant Dent 9 : 207, 2000   DOI
12 Hansson S : A conical implant-abutment interface at the level of the marginal bone improves the distribution of stresses in the supporting bone. Clin. Oral Implants Res 14 : 286, 2003   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Laney WR, Jemt T, Harris D et al : Osseointegrated implants for single tooth replacement : Progress report from a multicenter prospective study after 3 years. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 9(1) : 49, 1994
14 Weinberg LA : The biomechanics of force distribution in implant supported prostheses. Int Oral Maxillofac Implants 8 : 19, 1993
15 Sato Y, Teixera ER, Tsuga K et al : The effectiveness of a new algorithm on a three-dimensional finite element model construction of bone trabeculae in implant biomechanics. J Oral Rehabilitation 26 : 640, 1999   DOI
16 Lindquist LW, Carlsson GE, Jemt T : A prospective 15-year follow-up study of mandibular fixed prostheses supported by osseointegrated implants. Clinical results and marginal bone loss. Clin Oral implants Res 7 : 329, 1996   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Chun HJ, Cheong SY : Evaluation of design parameters of osseointegrated dental implants using finite element analysis. J Oral Rehabilitation 29 : 565, 2002   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Adell R, Eriksson B, Lekholm U et al : A long-term follow-up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally edentulous jaws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 5(4) : 347, 1990   PUBMED
19 Cowin SC : Bone mechanics, Boca Raton (FL), CRC Press, 1989
20 Wadamoto M, Akagawa Y, Sato Y et al : The three dimensional bone interface of an osseointegrated implant : A morphometric evaluation in initial healing. J Prosthet Dent 76 : 170, 1996   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Kim IK, Ryu SH, Kim JR et al : The three dimensional finite element analysis of the stress distribution according to the implant and thread designs. J Kor Maxillofac Plast and Reconst Surg 26(5) : 443, 2004
22 Weinberg LA : The biomechanics of force distribution in implant supported prostheses. Int Oral Maxillofac Implants 8 : 19, 1993
23 Isidor F : Loss of osseointegration caused by occlusal overload of oral implants: A clinical and radiographic study in monkeys. Clin Oral implants Res 7 : 143, 1996   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Craig RG : Restorative dental materials, 10th ed. St Louis, Mosby, 1996, p.56
25 Sakaguichi RL, Borgersen SE : Nonlinear contact analysis of preload in dental implant screw. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 10 : 295, 1995
26 Oosterwyck H, Duyck J, Sloten J et al : The influence of bone mechanical properties and implant fixation upon bone loading around oral implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 9 : 407, 1998   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Friberg B, Jemt T, Lekholm U : A study from stage I surgery to the connective of completed prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 6(2) : 142, 1991   PUBMED
28 Sato Y, Wadamoto M, Tsuga K. et al : The effectiveness of element downsizing on a three-dimensional finite element model of bone trabeculae in implant biomechanics. J Oral Rehabilitation 26 : 288, 1999   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Branemark PI : Introduction to osseointegration. Chicago, Quintessence, 1985, p.175
30 Sklak R : Biomechanical considerations in osseointegrated prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 49 : 843, 1983   DOI   ScienceOn