Literature DB >> 28349769

Finite element analysis of implant-supported prosthesis with pontic and cantilever in the posterior maxilla.

Victor Eduardo de Souza Batista1, Fellippo Ramos Verri2, Daniel Augusto de Faria Almeida3, Joel Ferreira Santiago Junior4, Cleidiel Aparecido Araújo Lemos1, Eduardo Piza Pellizzer5.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of pontic and cantilever designs (mesial and distal) on 3-unit implant-retained prosthesis at maxillary posterior region verifying stress and strain distributions on bone tissue (cortical and trabecular bones) and stress distribution in abutments, implants and fixation screws, under axial and oblique loadings, by 3D finite element analysis. Each model was composed of a bone block presenting right first premolar to the first molar, with three or two external hexagon implants (4.0 × 10 mm), supporting a 3-unit splinted dental fixed dental prosthesis with the variations: M1 - three implants supporting splinted crowns; M2 - two implants supporting prosthesis with central pontic; M3 - two implants supporting prosthesis with mesial cantilever; M4 - two implants supporting prosthesis with distal cantilever. The applied forces were 400 N axial and 200 N oblique. The von Mises criteria was used to evaluate abutments, implants and fixation screws and maximum principal stress and microstrain criteria were used to evaluate the bone tissue. The decrease of the number of implants caused an unfavorable biomechanical behavior for all structures (M2, M3, M4). For two implant-supported prostheses, the use of the central pontic (M2) showed stress and strain distributions more favorable in the analyzed structures. The use of cantilever showed unfavorable biomechanical behavior (M3 and M4), mainly for distal cantilever (M4). The use of three implants presented lower values of stress and strain on the analyzed structures. Among two implant-supported prostheses, prostheses with cantilever showed unfavorable biomechanical behavior in the analyzed structures, especially for distal cantilever.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Finite element analysis; biomechanical phenomena; dental implant

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28349769     DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2017.1287905

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin        ISSN: 1025-5842            Impact factor:   1.763


  5 in total

1.  Stability of Cantilever Fixed Dental Prostheses on Zirconia Implants.

Authors:  Nadja Rohr; Reto Nüesch; Rebecca Greune; Gino Mainetti; Sabrina Karlin; Lucia K Zaugg; Nicola U Zitzmann
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 3.748

2.  Two short implants versus one short implant with a cantilever: 5-Year results of a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Daniel S Thoma; Karin Wolleb; Roman Schellenberg; Franz-Josef Strauss; Christoph H F Hämmerle; Ronald E Jung
Journal:  J Clin Periodontol       Date:  2021-09-22       Impact factor: 7.478

3.  The Effect of the Length and Distribution of Implants for Fixed Prosthetic Reconstructions in the Atrophic Posterior Maxilla: A Finite Element Analysis.

Authors:  Brunilda Gashi Cenkoglu; Nilufer Bolukbasi Balcioglu; Tayfun Ozdemir; Eitan Mijiritsky
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2019-08-11       Impact factor: 3.623

4.  Principles of biomechanics in oral implantology.

Authors:  Avram Manea; Simion Bran; Cristian Dinu; Horatiu Rotaru; Ioan Barbur; Bogdan Crisan; Gabriel Armencea; Florin Onisor; Madalina Lazar; Daniel Ostas; Mihaela Baciut; Sergiu Vacaras; Ileana Mitre; Liana Crisan; Ovidiu Muresan; Rares Roman; Grigore Baciut
Journal:  Med Pharm Rep       Date:  2019-12-15

5.  Finite Element Method and Von Mises Investigation on Bone Response to Dynamic Stress with a Novel Conical Dental Implant Connection.

Authors:  Luca Fiorillo; Marco Cicciù; Cesare D'Amico; Rodolfo Mauceri; Giacomo Oteri; Gabriele Cervino
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-10-07       Impact factor: 3.411

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.