Biomechanical Finite Element Analysis of Two Types of Short-Angled Implants Across Various Bone Classifications

The aim of this finite element analysis (FEA) was to investigate the distribution of von Mises stress within dental implant components, as well as trabecular and cortical bone. The study considered various bone qualities that influence cortical thickness in contact with the implant, specifically exa...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Materials 2024-12, Vol.17 (23), p.5680
Hauptverfasser: Ceddia, Mario, Romasco, Tea, De Bortoli, Jr, Nilton, Mello, Bruno Freitas, Piattelli, Adriano, Mijiritsky, Eitan, Di Pietro, Natalia, Trentadue, Bartolomeo
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The aim of this finite element analysis (FEA) was to investigate the distribution of von Mises stress within dental implant components, as well as trabecular and cortical bone. The study considered various bone qualities that influence cortical thickness in contact with the implant, specifically examining cortical thicknesses of 0.5, 1.5, and 3 mm, corresponding to Bergkvist's classifications IV, III, and II, respectively. A simplified 3D model of the bone was developed for the analysis. Two short implants were inserted into the model: one with a 30° inclined abutment (IA) and another positioned at a 30° angle featuring a straight abutment (II). A vertical force (120 N) was applied to the upper surface of the abutments. FEA software was employed to assess the stresses on the peri-implant tissues and the implants. The findings indicated that a reduction in cortical bone thickness results in an increase in stress within the cortical bone. For IA, the stresses recorded 32.56, 56.12, and 96.14 MPa for cortical thicknesses of 3, 1.5, and 0.5 mm, respectively. Conversely, II exhibited increased stresses across all bone qualities (52.32, 76.15, and 126.32 MPa for the same cortical thicknesses). It is advisable to avoid II in cases of poor bone quality and thin cortical due to the heightened risk of overload-induced bone resorption; however, it may be preferable to use IA in scenarios involving good bone quality and thicker cortical.
ISSN:1996-1944
1996-1944
DOI:10.3390/ma17235680