Stress zones in sintered dental implants assessed by finite element analysis
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Introduction: Customized implants in teeth allow immediate postextraction placement with good adaptation to the alveolus, shortening waiting times in cases where regeneration is required, i.e. in conventional implants. Objective: Compare stress zones between sintered customized implants, conventional implants and, teeth using the finite element analysis. Material and methods: three models were generated by computer-aided-design: conventional implant, customized implant and natural tooth (upper second premolar); subjected to three fixed forces perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the tooth: 7.5 N, 100 N and 150 N. Results: The customized implant, compared to the conventional implant, has a better distribution of forces. When compared to the tooth, the greatest concentration of forces is found at the onset of mastication, dissipating throughout its structure. Conclusions: The customized implant distributes occlusal forces better along its entire axis, limiting stress zones, and maintains bone and connective tissue, improving the emergence profile. There is no possibility of fracture of definitive abutments or through screws.
Article Details
Citas en Dimensions Service
References
Araki H, Nakano T, Ono S, Yatani H. Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Extra Short Implants Focusing on Implant Designs and Materials. Int J Implant Dent. 2020; 29; 6(1): 5. DOI: 10.1186/s40729-019-0202-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0202-6
Brune A, Stiesch M, Eisenburger M, Greuling. The Effect of Different Occlusal Contact Situations on Peri-Implant Bone Stress – A Contact Finite Element Analysis of Indirect Axial Loading. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2019; 99: 367–73. DOI: 10.1016/j.msec.2019.01.104 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2019.01.104
Chen J, Zhang Z, Chen X, Zhang C, Zhang G, Xu Z. Design and Manufacture of Customized Dental Implants by Using Reverse Engineering and Selective Laser Melting Technology. J Prosthet Dent. 2018; 112(5): 1088–95.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.04.026 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.04.026
Moin DA, Hassan B, Wismeijer D. Immediate Nonsubmerged Custom Root Analog Implants: A Prospective Pilot Clinical Study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018; 33(2): e37–e44. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.6048 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.6048
Chen J, Zhang Z, Chen X, Zhang X. Influence of Custom-Made Implant Designs on the Biomechanical Performance for the Case of Immediate Post-Extraction Placement in the Maxillary Esthetic Zone: A Finite Element Analysis. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2017; 20(6): 636–44. DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2017.1283406 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10255842.2017.1283406
He L, Li D, Zhang J, Li X, Lu S, Tang Z. Influence of Different Abutment Designs on the Biomechanical Behavior of Dental Root-Analog Implant: A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis. Implant Dent. 2016; 25(6): 802–6. DOI: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000487 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000487
He L, Zhang J, Li X, Hu H, Lu S, Tang Z. Irregular Implant Design Decreases Periimplant Stress and Strain Under Oblique Loading. Implant Dent. 2017; 26(5): 744–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ID.0000000000000662
Huempfner-Hierl H, Schaller A, Hemprich A, Hier T. Biomechanical Investigation of Naso-Orbitoethmoid Traumaby Finite Element Analysis. Brit J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014; 52(9): 850–3. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2014.07.255 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2014.07.255
Igarashi K, Nakahara K, Haga-Tsujimura M, Kobayashi E, Watanabe F. Hard and Soft Tissue Responses to Three Different Implant Materials in a Dog Model. Dent Mat J. 2015; 34(5), 692–701. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2014-361 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2014-361
Jenny G, Jauernik J, Bierbaum S, Bigler M, Grätz K, Rücker M, et al. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Influence of Biological Implant Surface Coatings on Periimplant Bone Formation. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2016; 104(11): 2898–910. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.35805 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.35805
Hong DGK, Oh JH. Recent Advances in Dental Implants. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017; 39(1): 33. DOI: 10.1186/s40902-017-0132-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40902-017-0132-2
Kharsan V, Bandgar V, Mirza A, Jagtiani K, Dhariwal N, Kore R. Comparative Evaluation of Three Abutment-Implant Interfaces on Stress Distribution in and Around Different Implant Systems: A Finite Element Analysis. Contemp Clin Dent. 2019;10(4): 590–4. DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_739_18 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_739_18
Liu J, Dai Q, Weir MD, Schneider A, Zhang C, Hack GD, et al. Biocompatible Nanocomposite Enhanced Osteogenic and Cementogenic Differentiation of Periodontal Ligament Stem Cells In Vitro for Periodontal Regeneration. Materials (Basel). 2020; 13(21): 4951. DOI: 10.3390/ma13214951 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13214951
Mangano C, Piattelli A, Scarano A, Raspanti M, Shibli JA, Mangano FG, et al. A Light and Scanning Electron Microscopy Study of Human Direct Laser Metal Forming Dental Implants. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 2014; 34(1): e9–e17. DOI: 10.11607/prd.1213 DOI: https://doi.org/10.11607/prd.1213
Moraschini V, Poubel LA, Ferreira VF, Barboza Edos S. Evaluation of Survival and Success Rate of Dental Implants Reported in Longitudinal Studies with a Follow-Up Period of at least 10 Years: A Systematic Review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015; 44(33): 377–88. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2014.10.023 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2014.10.023
Oskui I, Hashemi A, Jafarzadeh H, Kato A. Finite Element Investigation of Human Maxillary Incisor Under Traumatic Loading: Static vs Dynamic Analysis. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2018; 155: 121–5. DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2017.12.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2017.12.007
Patankar A, Kshirsagar R, Patankar S, Pawar S. Immediate, Non Submerged Root Analog Zirconia Implant in Single Rooted Tooth Replacement: Case Report with 2 years Follow Up. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2016; 15 (supl. 2): 270–3. DOI: 10.1007/s12663-015-0786-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-015-0786-1
Patil SM, Deshpande AS, Bhalerao RR, Metkari SB, Patil PM. A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of the Influence of Varying Implant Crest Module Designs on the Stress Distribution To The Bone. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2019;16(3): 145–52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/1735-3327.255750
Prasad K, Bazaka O, Chua M, Rochford M, Fedrick L, Spoor J, et al. Metallic Biomaterials: Current Challenges and Opportunities. Materials (Basel). 2017; 10(8): 884. DOI: 10.3390/ma10080884 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ma10080884
Schubert O, Beuer F, Guth J, Nold E, Edelhoff D, Metz I. Two Digital Strategies in Modern Implantology-Root-Analogue Implants and the Digital One-Abutment/One Time Concept. Int J Comput Dent. 2018; 21(2): 115–31.
Tunchel S, Blay A, Kolerman R, Mijiritsky E, Shibli A. 3D Printing/Additive Manufacturing Single Titanium Dental Implants: A Prospective Multicenter Study with 3 Years of Follow-Up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016; 8590971. DOI: 10.1155/2016/8590971 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/8590971
Westover B. Three-Dimensional Custom-Root Replicate Tooth Dental Implants. Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2019; 31(3): 489–96. DOI: 10.1016/j.coms.2019.03.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coms.2019.03.010
Revista Odontológica Mexicana por Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México se distribuye bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivar 4.0 Internacional.
Basada en una obra en http://revistas.unam.mx/index.php/rom.