Comparative stress distribution of implant-retained mandibular ball-supported and bar-supported overlay dentures: a finite element analysis
Implant-retained mandibular ball-supported and bar-supported overlay dentures are the two most common treatment options for the edentulous mandible. The superior option in terms of strain distribution should be determined. The three-dimensional model of mandible (based on computerized tomography sca...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of oral implantology 2011-08, Vol.37 (4), p.421-429 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 429 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 421 |
| container_title | The Journal of oral implantology |
| container_volume | 37 |
| creator | Vafaei, Fariborz Khoshhal, Masoumeh Bayat-Movahed, Saeed Ahangary, Ahmad Hassan Firooz, Farnaz Izady, Alireza Rakhshan, Vahid |
| description | Implant-retained mandibular ball-supported and bar-supported overlay dentures are the two most common treatment options for the edentulous mandible. The superior option in terms of strain distribution should be determined. The three-dimensional model of mandible (based on computerized tomography scan) and its overlying implant-retained bar-supported and ball-supported overlay dentures were simulated using SolidWorks, NURBS, and ANSYS Workbench. Loads A (60 N) and B (60 N) were exerted, respectively, in protrusive and laterotrusive motions, on second molar mesial, first molar mesial, and first premolar. The strain distribution patterns were assessed on (1) implant tissue, (2) first implant-bone, and (3) second implant-bone interfaces. Protrusive: Strain was mostly detected in the apical of the fixtures and least in the cervical when bar design was used. On the nonworking side, however, strain was higher in the cervical and lower in the apical compared with the working side implant. Laterotrusive: The strain values were closely similar in the two designs. It seems that both designs are acceptable in terms of stress distribution, although a superior pattern is associated with the application of bar design in protrusive motion. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1563/aaid-joi-d-10-00057 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_910653612</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>910653612</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-88ed6f1e2c1a02807318fbcd503d1076541931faa9d592e75ac345bbffb614563</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1u1DAUhS0EokPhCZCQxaYrg69_E3ajaWkHVeqGriMndiSPnDjYTqV5Bl4aT1sQYsPK1jnfPdK9B6H3QD-BVPyzMd6SQ_TEEqCEUir1C7QBKRoCnKuXaENBUaJazc7Qm5wPlDIpJbxGZ4xqYELwDfq5i9Nikin-weFckssZW18_vl-LjzOOI_bTEsxcSHLF-NlZPJnZVj-YhHsTAsnrssRUqlONKqW_lPjgUjBHbN1c1hr_BRs8-tkXh11wU1XrkAnH7PNb9Go0Ibt3z-85uv969X13Q27vrve77S0ZhBaFNI2zagTHBjCUNVRzaMZ-sJJyC1QrKaDlMBrTWtkyp6UZuJB9P469AlEvd44unnKXFH-sLpdu8nlwoS7p4pq7FqiSXAH7L9k0QjDNeFPJj_-Qh7imutgJ0sBrZFsh_gQNKeac3NgtyU8mHTug3anTbrvdX3bf7vbd5Ul67LROfXiOXvvJ2T8zv0vkvwChRqD-</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>887131069</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparative stress distribution of implant-retained mandibular ball-supported and bar-supported overlay dentures: a finite element analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Allen Press Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Vafaei, Fariborz ; Khoshhal, Masoumeh ; Bayat-Movahed, Saeed ; Ahangary, Ahmad Hassan ; Firooz, Farnaz ; Izady, Alireza ; Rakhshan, Vahid</creator><creatorcontrib>Vafaei, Fariborz ; Khoshhal, Masoumeh ; Bayat-Movahed, Saeed ; Ahangary, Ahmad Hassan ; Firooz, Farnaz ; Izady, Alireza ; Rakhshan, Vahid</creatorcontrib><description>Implant-retained mandibular ball-supported and bar-supported overlay dentures are the two most common treatment options for the edentulous mandible. The superior option in terms of strain distribution should be determined. The three-dimensional model of mandible (based on computerized tomography scan) and its overlying implant-retained bar-supported and ball-supported overlay dentures were simulated using SolidWorks, NURBS, and ANSYS Workbench. Loads A (60 N) and B (60 N) were exerted, respectively, in protrusive and laterotrusive motions, on second molar mesial, first molar mesial, and first premolar. The strain distribution patterns were assessed on (1) implant tissue, (2) first implant-bone, and (3) second implant-bone interfaces. Protrusive: Strain was mostly detected in the apical of the fixtures and least in the cervical when bar design was used. On the nonworking side, however, strain was higher in the cervical and lower in the apical compared with the working side implant. Laterotrusive: The strain values were closely similar in the two designs. It seems that both designs are acceptable in terms of stress distribution, although a superior pattern is associated with the application of bar design in protrusive motion.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0160-6972</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1548-1336</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1563/aaid-joi-d-10-00057</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20712443</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Allen Press Inc</publisher><subject>Computer Simulation ; Dental Prosthesis Design ; Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported ; Dental Stress Analysis - methods ; Dentistry ; Denture Retention - instrumentation ; Denture, Overlay ; Dentures ; Elastic Modulus ; Finite Element Analysis ; Humans ; Jaw, Edentulous - diagnostic imaging ; Load ; Mandible ; Stress analysis ; Stress, Mechanical ; Studies ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed</subject><ispartof>The Journal of oral implantology, 2011-08, Vol.37 (4), p.421-429</ispartof><rights>Copyright Allen Press Publishing Services 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-88ed6f1e2c1a02807318fbcd503d1076541931faa9d592e75ac345bbffb614563</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-88ed6f1e2c1a02807318fbcd503d1076541931faa9d592e75ac345bbffb614563</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20712443$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Vafaei, Fariborz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khoshhal, Masoumeh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bayat-Movahed, Saeed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahangary, Ahmad Hassan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Firooz, Farnaz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Izady, Alireza</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rakhshan, Vahid</creatorcontrib><title>Comparative stress distribution of implant-retained mandibular ball-supported and bar-supported overlay dentures: a finite element analysis</title><title>The Journal of oral implantology</title><addtitle>J Oral Implantol</addtitle><description>Implant-retained mandibular ball-supported and bar-supported overlay dentures are the two most common treatment options for the edentulous mandible. The superior option in terms of strain distribution should be determined. The three-dimensional model of mandible (based on computerized tomography scan) and its overlying implant-retained bar-supported and ball-supported overlay dentures were simulated using SolidWorks, NURBS, and ANSYS Workbench. Loads A (60 N) and B (60 N) were exerted, respectively, in protrusive and laterotrusive motions, on second molar mesial, first molar mesial, and first premolar. The strain distribution patterns were assessed on (1) implant tissue, (2) first implant-bone, and (3) second implant-bone interfaces. Protrusive: Strain was mostly detected in the apical of the fixtures and least in the cervical when bar design was used. On the nonworking side, however, strain was higher in the cervical and lower in the apical compared with the working side implant. Laterotrusive: The strain values were closely similar in the two designs. It seems that both designs are acceptable in terms of stress distribution, although a superior pattern is associated with the application of bar design in protrusive motion.</description><subject>Computer Simulation</subject><subject>Dental Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</subject><subject>Dental Stress Analysis - methods</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Denture Retention - instrumentation</subject><subject>Denture, Overlay</subject><subject>Dentures</subject><subject>Elastic Modulus</subject><subject>Finite Element Analysis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Jaw, Edentulous - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Load</subject><subject>Mandible</subject><subject>Stress analysis</subject><subject>Stress, Mechanical</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed</subject><issn>0160-6972</issn><issn>1548-1336</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc1u1DAUhS0EokPhCZCQxaYrg69_E3ajaWkHVeqGriMndiSPnDjYTqV5Bl4aT1sQYsPK1jnfPdK9B6H3QD-BVPyzMd6SQ_TEEqCEUir1C7QBKRoCnKuXaENBUaJazc7Qm5wPlDIpJbxGZ4xqYELwDfq5i9Nikin-weFckssZW18_vl-LjzOOI_bTEsxcSHLF-NlZPJnZVj-YhHsTAsnrssRUqlONKqW_lPjgUjBHbN1c1hr_BRs8-tkXh11wU1XrkAnH7PNb9Go0Ibt3z-85uv969X13Q27vrve77S0ZhBaFNI2zagTHBjCUNVRzaMZ-sJJyC1QrKaDlMBrTWtkyp6UZuJB9P469AlEvd44unnKXFH-sLpdu8nlwoS7p4pq7FqiSXAH7L9k0QjDNeFPJj_-Qh7imutgJ0sBrZFsh_gQNKeac3NgtyU8mHTug3anTbrvdX3bf7vbd5Ul67LROfXiOXvvJ2T8zv0vkvwChRqD-</recordid><startdate>20110801</startdate><enddate>20110801</enddate><creator>Vafaei, Fariborz</creator><creator>Khoshhal, Masoumeh</creator><creator>Bayat-Movahed, Saeed</creator><creator>Ahangary, Ahmad Hassan</creator><creator>Firooz, Farnaz</creator><creator>Izady, Alireza</creator><creator>Rakhshan, Vahid</creator><general>Allen Press Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110801</creationdate><title>Comparative stress distribution of implant-retained mandibular ball-supported and bar-supported overlay dentures: a finite element analysis</title><author>Vafaei, Fariborz ; Khoshhal, Masoumeh ; Bayat-Movahed, Saeed ; Ahangary, Ahmad Hassan ; Firooz, Farnaz ; Izady, Alireza ; Rakhshan, Vahid</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-88ed6f1e2c1a02807318fbcd503d1076541931faa9d592e75ac345bbffb614563</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Computer Simulation</topic><topic>Dental Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported</topic><topic>Dental Stress Analysis - methods</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Denture Retention - instrumentation</topic><topic>Denture, Overlay</topic><topic>Dentures</topic><topic>Elastic Modulus</topic><topic>Finite Element Analysis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Jaw, Edentulous - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Load</topic><topic>Mandible</topic><topic>Stress analysis</topic><topic>Stress, Mechanical</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Vafaei, Fariborz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khoshhal, Masoumeh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bayat-Movahed, Saeed</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahangary, Ahmad Hassan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Firooz, Farnaz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Izady, Alireza</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rakhshan, Vahid</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The Journal of oral implantology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Vafaei, Fariborz</au><au>Khoshhal, Masoumeh</au><au>Bayat-Movahed, Saeed</au><au>Ahangary, Ahmad Hassan</au><au>Firooz, Farnaz</au><au>Izady, Alireza</au><au>Rakhshan, Vahid</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparative stress distribution of implant-retained mandibular ball-supported and bar-supported overlay dentures: a finite element analysis</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of oral implantology</jtitle><addtitle>J Oral Implantol</addtitle><date>2011-08-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>421</spage><epage>429</epage><pages>421-429</pages><issn>0160-6972</issn><eissn>1548-1336</eissn><abstract>Implant-retained mandibular ball-supported and bar-supported overlay dentures are the two most common treatment options for the edentulous mandible. The superior option in terms of strain distribution should be determined. The three-dimensional model of mandible (based on computerized tomography scan) and its overlying implant-retained bar-supported and ball-supported overlay dentures were simulated using SolidWorks, NURBS, and ANSYS Workbench. Loads A (60 N) and B (60 N) were exerted, respectively, in protrusive and laterotrusive motions, on second molar mesial, first molar mesial, and first premolar. The strain distribution patterns were assessed on (1) implant tissue, (2) first implant-bone, and (3) second implant-bone interfaces. Protrusive: Strain was mostly detected in the apical of the fixtures and least in the cervical when bar design was used. On the nonworking side, however, strain was higher in the cervical and lower in the apical compared with the working side implant. Laterotrusive: The strain values were closely similar in the two designs. It seems that both designs are acceptable in terms of stress distribution, although a superior pattern is associated with the application of bar design in protrusive motion.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Allen Press Inc</pub><pmid>20712443</pmid><doi>10.1563/aaid-joi-d-10-00057</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0160-6972 |
| ispartof | The Journal of oral implantology, 2011-08, Vol.37 (4), p.421-429 |
| issn | 0160-6972 1548-1336 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_910653612 |
| source | MEDLINE; Allen Press Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Computer Simulation Dental Prosthesis Design Dental Prosthesis, Implant-Supported Dental Stress Analysis - methods Dentistry Denture Retention - instrumentation Denture, Overlay Dentures Elastic Modulus Finite Element Analysis Humans Jaw, Edentulous - diagnostic imaging Load Mandible Stress analysis Stress, Mechanical Studies Tomography, X-Ray Computed |
| title | Comparative stress distribution of implant-retained mandibular ball-supported and bar-supported overlay dentures: a finite element analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T15%3A44%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative%20stress%20distribution%20of%20implant-retained%20mandibular%20ball-supported%20and%20bar-supported%20overlay%20dentures:%20a%20finite%20element%20analysis&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20oral%20implantology&rft.au=Vafaei,%20Fariborz&rft.date=2011-08-01&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=421&rft.epage=429&rft.pages=421-429&rft.issn=0160-6972&rft.eissn=1548-1336&rft_id=info:doi/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-10-00057&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E910653612%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=887131069&rft_id=info:pmid/20712443&rfr_iscdi=true |