• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.46 no.4
• /
• pp.359-371
• /
• 2008

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the stress distribution in mandibular implant overdentures with telescopic crowns compared to bar attachment. Material and methods: Three-dimensional finite element models consisting of the mandibular bone, 4 implants, and primary bar-splinted superstructure or secondary splinted superstructure with telescopic crowns were created. Vertical and oblique loads were directed onto the occlusal areas of the superstructures to simulate the maximal intercuspal contacts and working contacts such as group function occlusion. Maximum stress and stress distribution were analysed in mandibular bone, implant abutments, and superstructures. Results: 1. In comparison of von Mises stress on mandibular bone, telescopic overdenture had a little lower stress values in vertical load and working side load except oblique load. In the mandible, the telescopic overdenture distributed more uniform stress than the bar overdenture. 2. In comparison of von Mises stress on implant abutments, telescopic overdenture had much lower stress values in all load conditions. In implant abutments, the telescopic overdenture distributed stress similar to the bar overdenture. Stress was concentrated on the distal surfaces of the posterior implant abutments in both mandibular overdentures. 3. In comparison of von Mises stress on superstructures, the telescopic overdenture had much more stress values in all load conditions. However, the telescopic overdenture distributed more uniform stress on superstructure than the bar overdenture. In the bar overdenture, stress was concentrated on each cental area of bar structures and connected area between implant abutments and bar structures. Conclusion: In the results of this study, the telescopic overdenture had lower stress values than the bar overdenture in mandibular bone and implant abutments, but more stress values in superstructures. However, if optimal material was selected in making superstructures, the telescopic overdenture was compared to the bar overdenture in stress distribution.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.59 no.1
• /
• pp.55-62
• /
• 2021

The mandible has a smaller support area than the maxilla, and in particular, in patients with generalized alveolar bone resorption, the stability of the denture and the masticatory efficiency are significantly low in the case of conventional complete denture, due to the movement of the tongue and mandible. In these patients, implant overdenture is evaluated as a highly predictable treatment method with high retention and stability, and excellent pronunciation and masticatory force. In this clinical case, patient had an edentulous maxilla and generalized alveolar bone resorption in mandible. Therefore, complete denture was placed in the maxilla and implant overdenture using milled bar attachment on 4 implants was placed in the mandible. During the 12-year follow-up period, changes in periodontal tissue and denture around the implants were periodically managed and observed.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.50 no.1
• /
• pp.10-20
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the stress distribution in mandibular implant-supported overdentures and tooth-supported overdentures with telescopic crowns. Materials and methods: The assumption of this study was that there were 2, 3, 4 natural teeth and implants which are located in the second premolar and canine regions in various distributed conditions. The mandible, teeth (or implants and abutments), and connectors are modeled, and analyzed with the commercial software, ANSYS Version 10.1. Stress distribution was evaluated under 150 N vertical load bilaterally on 3 experimental conditions - between canine areas, canine and $2^{nd}$ premolars, 10 mm posterior to $2^{nd}$ premolars. Results: Overall, the case of the implant group showed more stress than the case of the teeth group in stress distribution to bone. In stress distribution to superstructures of tooth and implants, there was no significant difference between TH group and IM group and the highest stress appeared in TH-IV and IM-IV. The stress caused from bar was much higher than those of implant and tooth. TH group showed less stress than IM group in stress distribution to abutment teeth and implant. Conclusion: The results shows that it is crucial to make sure that distance between impact loading point and abutment tooth does not get too far apart, and if it does, it is at best to set abutment tooth on premolar tooth region. It will be necessary to conduct more experiments on effects on implants, natural teeth and bone, in order to apply these results to a clinical treatment.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.55 no.2
• /
• pp.198-204
• /
• 2017

Maxillofacial defect comes from congenital defect, trauma and surgical resection. Patients with intraoral defect are commonly related to maxillary defect and they need prosthetic rehabilitation. Functional reconstruction of partially edentulous mandible has many limitations. However, if both condyles are intact, maxillofacial prosthesis using partial denture give competent results. In this case, a patient of 58 year-old male has a defect on palate and left mandibular posterior teeth from gunshot. The maxillary defect of this patient is Class IV according to Aramany classification and the mandibular one is Type V according to Cantor and Curtis classification. For retention of the obturator, remaining teeth are fully utilized and artificial teeth are arranged harmoniously to provide stable occlusion. Mandibular RPD covered limited range of deformed soft tissue derived from mandibular resection surgery. With these treatments, the patient in this case showed improvements in mastication, swallowing and speech.