• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.46 no.3
• /
• pp.290-297
• /
• 2008

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Implant-supported fixed cantilever prostheses are influenced by various biomechanical factors. The information that shows the effect of implant number and position of cantilever on stress in the supporting bone is limited. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of implant number variation and the effect of 2 different cantilever types on stress distribution in the supporting bone, using 3-dimensional finite element analysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A 3-D FE model of a mandibular section of bone with a missing second premolar, first molar, and second molar was developed. $4.1{\times}10$ mm screw-type dental implant was selected. 4.0 mm height solid abutments were fixed over all implant fixtures. Type III gold alloy was selected for implant-supported fixed prostheses. For mesial cantilever test, model 1-1 which has three $4.1{\times}10$ mm implants and fixed prosthesis with no pontic, model 1-2 which has two $4.1{\times}10$ mm implants and fixed prosthesis with a central pontic and model 1-3 which has two $4.1{\times}10$ mm implants and fixed prosthesis with mesial cantilever were simulated. And then, 155N oblique force was applied to the buccal cusp of second premolar. For distal cantilever test, model 2-1 which has three $4.1{\times}10$ mm implants and fixed prosthesis with no pontic, model 2-2 which has two $4.1{\times}10$ mm implants and fixed prosthesis with a central pontic and model 2-3 which has two $4.1{\times}10$ mm implants and fixed prosthesis with distal cantilever were simulated. And then, 206N oblique force was applied to the buccal cusp of second premolar. The implant and superstructure were simulated in finite element software(Pro/Engineer wildfire 2.0). The stress values were observed with the maximum von Mises stresses. RESULTS: Among the models without a cantilever, model 1-1 and 2-1 which had three implants, showed lower stress than model 1-2 and 2-2 which had two implants. Although model 2-1 was applied with 206N, it showed lower stress than model 1-2 which was applied with 155N. In models that implant positions of models were same, the amount of applied occlusal load largely influenced the maximum von Mises stress. Model 1-1, 1-2 and 1-3, which were loaded with 155N, showed less stress than corresponding model 2-1, 2-2 and 2- 3 which were loaded with 206N. For the same number of implants, the existence of a cantilever induced the obvious increase of maximum stress. Model 1-3 and 2-3 which had a cantilever, showed much higher stress than the others which had no cantilever. In all models, the von Mises stresses were concentrated at the cortical bone around the cervical region of the implants. Meanwhile, in model 1-1, 1-2 and 1-3, which were loaded on second premolar position, the first premolar participated in stress distribution. First premolars of model 2-1, 2-2 and 2-3 did not participate in stress distribution. CONCLUSION: 1. The more implants supported, the less stress was induced, regardless of applied occlusal loads. 2. The maximum von Mises stress in the bone of the implant-supported three unit fixed dental prosthesis with a mesial cantilever was 1.38 times that with a central pontic. The maximum von Mises stress in the bone of the implant-supported three-unit fixed dental prosthesis with a distal cantilever was 1.59 times that with a central pontic. 3. A distal cantilever induced larger stress in the bone than a mesial cantilever. 4. A adjacent tooth which contacts implant-supported fixed prosthesis participated in the stress distribution.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.47 no.1
• /
• pp.46-52
• /
• 2009

Statement of problem: Recently, titanium has become popular as superstructure material in implant dentistry because titanium superstructure can be easily milled by means of computer-aided design and manufacture (CAD/CAM) technique. But retention form such as nail head or bead cannot be cut as a result of technical limitation of CAD/CAM milling and bond strength between titanium and porcelain is not as strong as that of conventional gold or metal alloy. Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate the shear bond strength of three different materials: heat curing resin, composite resin, porcelain which were bonded to grade II commercially pure Titanium (CP-Ti). Material and methods: Thirty seven CP-Ti discs with 9 mm diameter, 10 mm height were divided into three groups and were bonded with heat curing resin (Lucitone 199), indirect composite resin (Sinfony), and porcelain (Triceram) which were mounted in a former with 7 mm diameter and 1 mm height. Samples were thermocycled for 1000 cycles at between $5-55^{\circ}C$. Shear bond strength (MPa) was measured with Instron Universal Testing Machine with cross head speed of 1 mm/min. The failure pattern was observed at the fractured surface and divided into adhesive, cohesive, and combination failure. The data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA and Scheffe's multiple range test (${\alpha}=0.05$). Results: Lucitone 199 ($17.82{\pm}5.13\;MPa$) showed the highest shear bond strength, followed by Triceram ($12.97{\pm}2.11\;MPa$), and Sinfony ($6.00{\pm}1.31\;MPa$). Most of the failure patterns in Lucitone 199 and Sinfony group were adhesive failure, whereas those in Triceram group were combination failure. Conclusion: Heat curing resin formed the strongest bond to titanium which is used as a CAD/CAM milling block. But the bond strength is still low compared with the bond utilizing mechanical interlocking and there are many adhesive failures which suggest that more studies to enhance bond strength are needed.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.31 no.2
• /
• pp.271-300
• /
• 1993

The purpose of this study was to analyze the stress distribution at supporting bone according to the types of connection modality between implant and tooth in the superstrcture. This investigation evaluated the stress patterns in a photoelastic model produced by three different types of dental implants such as Branemark, Steri-Oss, IMZ and resin tooth using the techniques of quasi three dimensional photoelasticity. The teeth-supported bridge had a first molar pontic supported by second premolar and second molar as a control group. The implant and toothsupported bridge had a first molar pontic supported by second premolar and implant posterior retainer as an experimental group. Prostheses were mechanically connected to an adjacent second premolar by the rigid of nonrigid connection, Nonrigid connection used an attachment placed between the tooth-supported and fixture-supported component. The female(keyway) of attachment was placed on the distal end of the retainer supported by the tooth ; the male(Key) of attachment connected to the osseointegrated bridge was engaged into the keyway. All prostheses were casted in the same nonprecious alloy and were cemented and screwed on their respective abutments and implants. 16㎏ of vertical loads on central fossae of second premolar, first molar pontic, implant of second molar were applied respectively and 6.5㎏ of inclined load on middle buccal surface of first molar pontic was applied. The results were as follows : 1. Under the vertical load on the central fossa of first mloar pontic, the stress developed at the apex of tooth of implat was more uniformly distributed in the case of nonrigid connection than in the case of rigid connection. 2. Under the vertical load on the central fossa of first molar pontic, the stress developed around the cervical area of tooth of implant was larger in the case of rigid connection than in the case of nonrigid connection because the bending moment was more occured in the case of rigid connection than in the case of nonrigid connection. 3. Stress was more restricted to the loaded side of nonrigid connection than to that of rigid connection 4. Under the inclined load. The set screw loosening of implant was more easily occured in the case of nonrigid connection than in the case of rigid connection due to torque moment. 5. In the case of Branemark implant, the stress concentration in second premolar was larger and the stress developed around the cervical area of implant was lower than any other cases under the vertical load, because Branemark implant with the flexible gold screw was showed in incline toward second premolar by a bending moment. 6. The stress developed around the apex of tooth or implant was more uniformly distributed in the case of Steri-Oss implant with stiff screw than in the case of Branemark implant under the vertical load. But, the stress developed around the cervical area of the Steri-Oss implant was larger than that of any other implants because bending moment was occured by vertical migration of second premolar. 7. The stress distribution in the case of IMZ implant was similar to the case of natural teeth under small vertical load. But, the residual stress around the implant was showed to occurdue to deformation of IMC and sinking of screw under larger vertical load.