Comparison of Two Types of Patient Specific Implants (PSI) and Quad Zygoma Implant (QZI) for Rehabilitation of Post-COVID Maxillary Mucormycosis Defect (PCMMD): Finite Element Analysis
Introduction The residual post-COVID maxillary mucormycosis defect (PCMMD) were extensive, due to unilateral or bilateral maxillectomies. The Goal of rehabilitation of PCMMD is to deliver a prosthetically driven reconstruction. FEA was to evaluate the biomechanical response of PSI struts (PSI 1), PS...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery 2023-09, Vol.22 (3), p.688-694 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 694 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 688 |
| container_title | Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery |
| container_volume | 22 |
| creator | Manekar, Varsha Sunil Datarkar, Abhay N. Ghormode, Ashlesha Daware, Surendra Pandilwar, Prashant Sapkal, Pranav |
| description | Introduction
The residual post-COVID maxillary mucormycosis defect (PCMMD) were extensive, due to unilateral or bilateral maxillectomies. The Goal of rehabilitation of PCMMD is to deliver a prosthetically driven reconstruction. FEA was to evaluate the biomechanical response of PSI struts (PSI 1), PSI Screw retained (PSI 2) and QZI to masticatory load on virtual simulation to improve accuracy and enhance the design.
Aim
To validate and compare the Biomechanical benefit of the PSI struts, PSI Screw retained, QZI in a case of rehabilitation of post-COVID maxillary mucormycosis defect (PCMMD) by FEA study.
Methodology
The result of stress to masticatory load on virtual simulation for (1) Maximum and minimum stress (Von Mises stress); (2) the Displacement (in three positions) and (3) the Deformation (Plastic strain) was compared on virtual simulation for PSI 1 and PSI 2 and QZI.
Conclusion
The FEA and comparative evaluation of PSI 1, PSI 2 and QZI showed a good resistance to displacement. The stress and strain values are low and acceptable. In comparison QZI shows more stress in the anterior region. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s12663-023-01950-3 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10390377</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2920433344</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-6af86c7737fb4c967b1c57433c44d76d4e94e830911ffa8a0a9c105879dfcb3c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9ks1u1DAUhSMEotXQF2CBLLGZLgJ27MQxG1Rl2jJSR53SAaFuLMexp66SOLUTaN6Mx8PTtOVngSXLtu7nc8-VThS9RvAdgpC-9yjJMhzDJGzEUhjjZ9E-ZJTEjCTfnt_fkzhPKNuLDry_gWFhhBlGL6M9TFNMMMn2o5-FbTrhjLctsBpsfliwGTvld4-16I1qe3DZKWm0kWDZdLVoew_m68vlIRBtBS4GUYGrcWsb8VgG84urUNXWgc_qWpSmNn1Qmhqsre_j4vzrcgFW4s7UtXAjWA3SumaU1hsPFkorGUTWxWq1OPwATkxregWOa9XszBy1oh4D9yp6oUXt1cHDOYu-nBxvik_x2fnpsjg6iyWhaR9nQueZpBRTXRLJMloimVKCsSSkollFFCMqx5AhpLXIBRRMIpjmlFValljiWfRx0u2GslGVDB6cqHnnTBOscysM_7vSmmu-td85gphBHDrPovmDgrO3g_I9b4yXKozeKjt4nuQkzdIUEhbQt_-gN3ZwYeJAsQQG25iQQCUTJZ313in95AZBvgsHn8LBQzj4fTg4Dp_e_DnH05fHKAQAT4APpXar3O_e_5H9Ba-mxV4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2920433344</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Two Types of Patient Specific Implants (PSI) and Quad Zygoma Implant (QZI) for Rehabilitation of Post-COVID Maxillary Mucormycosis Defect (PCMMD): Finite Element Analysis</title><source>SpringerLink</source><source>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</source><source>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><source>ProQuest Central</source><creator>Manekar, Varsha Sunil ; Datarkar, Abhay N. ; Ghormode, Ashlesha ; Daware, Surendra ; Pandilwar, Prashant ; Sapkal, Pranav</creator><creatorcontrib>Manekar, Varsha Sunil ; Datarkar, Abhay N. ; Ghormode, Ashlesha ; Daware, Surendra ; Pandilwar, Prashant ; Sapkal, Pranav</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction
The residual post-COVID maxillary mucormycosis defect (PCMMD) were extensive, due to unilateral or bilateral maxillectomies. The Goal of rehabilitation of PCMMD is to deliver a prosthetically driven reconstruction. FEA was to evaluate the biomechanical response of PSI struts (PSI 1), PSI Screw retained (PSI 2) and QZI to masticatory load on virtual simulation to improve accuracy and enhance the design.
Aim
To validate and compare the Biomechanical benefit of the PSI struts, PSI Screw retained, QZI in a case of rehabilitation of post-COVID maxillary mucormycosis defect (PCMMD) by FEA study.
Methodology
The result of stress to masticatory load on virtual simulation for (1) Maximum and minimum stress (Von Mises stress); (2) the Displacement (in three positions) and (3) the Deformation (Plastic strain) was compared on virtual simulation for PSI 1 and PSI 2 and QZI.
Conclusion
The FEA and comparative evaluation of PSI 1, PSI 2 and QZI showed a good resistance to displacement. The stress and strain values are low and acceptable. In comparison QZI shows more stress in the anterior region.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0972-8279</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 0974-942X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s12663-023-01950-3</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37534346</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New Delhi: Springer India</publisher><subject>Biomechanics ; Defects ; Dental implants ; Dentistry ; Design ; Finite element analysis ; Fungal infections ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery ; Original ; Original Article ; Otorhinolaryngology ; Plastic Surgery ; Prostheses ; Rehabilitation ; Simulation ; Software</subject><ispartof>Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery, 2023-09, Vol.22 (3), p.688-694</ispartof><rights>The Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons of India 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-6af86c7737fb4c967b1c57433c44d76d4e94e830911ffa8a0a9c105879dfcb3c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-6af86c7737fb4c967b1c57433c44d76d4e94e830911ffa8a0a9c105879dfcb3c3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-7838-4089 ; 0000-0002-7019-8329 ; 0000-0001-9576-6014 ; 0000-0003-1975-8199</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10390377/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2920433344?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,728,781,785,886,21390,21391,27926,27927,33532,33533,33746,33747,41490,42559,43661,43807,51321,53793,53795,64387,64389,64391,72471</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37534346$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Manekar, Varsha Sunil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Datarkar, Abhay N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghormode, Ashlesha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daware, Surendra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pandilwar, Prashant</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sapkal, Pranav</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Two Types of Patient Specific Implants (PSI) and Quad Zygoma Implant (QZI) for Rehabilitation of Post-COVID Maxillary Mucormycosis Defect (PCMMD): Finite Element Analysis</title><title>Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery</title><addtitle>J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg</addtitle><addtitle>J Maxillofac Oral Surg</addtitle><description>Introduction
The residual post-COVID maxillary mucormycosis defect (PCMMD) were extensive, due to unilateral or bilateral maxillectomies. The Goal of rehabilitation of PCMMD is to deliver a prosthetically driven reconstruction. FEA was to evaluate the biomechanical response of PSI struts (PSI 1), PSI Screw retained (PSI 2) and QZI to masticatory load on virtual simulation to improve accuracy and enhance the design.
Aim
To validate and compare the Biomechanical benefit of the PSI struts, PSI Screw retained, QZI in a case of rehabilitation of post-COVID maxillary mucormycosis defect (PCMMD) by FEA study.
Methodology
The result of stress to masticatory load on virtual simulation for (1) Maximum and minimum stress (Von Mises stress); (2) the Displacement (in three positions) and (3) the Deformation (Plastic strain) was compared on virtual simulation for PSI 1 and PSI 2 and QZI.
Conclusion
The FEA and comparative evaluation of PSI 1, PSI 2 and QZI showed a good resistance to displacement. The stress and strain values are low and acceptable. In comparison QZI shows more stress in the anterior region.</description><subject>Biomechanics</subject><subject>Defects</subject><subject>Dental implants</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Design</subject><subject>Finite element analysis</subject><subject>Fungal infections</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Otorhinolaryngology</subject><subject>Plastic Surgery</subject><subject>Prostheses</subject><subject>Rehabilitation</subject><subject>Simulation</subject><subject>Software</subject><issn>0972-8279</issn><issn>0974-942X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNp9ks1u1DAUhSMEotXQF2CBLLGZLgJ27MQxG1Rl2jJSR53SAaFuLMexp66SOLUTaN6Mx8PTtOVngSXLtu7nc8-VThS9RvAdgpC-9yjJMhzDJGzEUhjjZ9E-ZJTEjCTfnt_fkzhPKNuLDry_gWFhhBlGL6M9TFNMMMn2o5-FbTrhjLctsBpsfliwGTvld4-16I1qe3DZKWm0kWDZdLVoew_m68vlIRBtBS4GUYGrcWsb8VgG84urUNXWgc_qWpSmNn1Qmhqsre_j4vzrcgFW4s7UtXAjWA3SumaU1hsPFkorGUTWxWq1OPwATkxregWOa9XszBy1oh4D9yp6oUXt1cHDOYu-nBxvik_x2fnpsjg6iyWhaR9nQueZpBRTXRLJMloimVKCsSSkollFFCMqx5AhpLXIBRRMIpjmlFValljiWfRx0u2GslGVDB6cqHnnTBOscysM_7vSmmu-td85gphBHDrPovmDgrO3g_I9b4yXKozeKjt4nuQkzdIUEhbQt_-gN3ZwYeJAsQQG25iQQCUTJZ313in95AZBvgsHn8LBQzj4fTg4Dp_e_DnH05fHKAQAT4APpXar3O_e_5H9Ba-mxV4</recordid><startdate>20230901</startdate><enddate>20230901</enddate><creator>Manekar, Varsha Sunil</creator><creator>Datarkar, Abhay N.</creator><creator>Ghormode, Ashlesha</creator><creator>Daware, Surendra</creator><creator>Pandilwar, Prashant</creator><creator>Sapkal, Pranav</creator><general>Springer India</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7838-4089</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7019-8329</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9576-6014</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1975-8199</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230901</creationdate><title>Comparison of Two Types of Patient Specific Implants (PSI) and Quad Zygoma Implant (QZI) for Rehabilitation of Post-COVID Maxillary Mucormycosis Defect (PCMMD): Finite Element Analysis</title><author>Manekar, Varsha Sunil ; Datarkar, Abhay N. ; Ghormode, Ashlesha ; Daware, Surendra ; Pandilwar, Prashant ; Sapkal, Pranav</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c475t-6af86c7737fb4c967b1c57433c44d76d4e94e830911ffa8a0a9c105879dfcb3c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Biomechanics</topic><topic>Defects</topic><topic>Dental implants</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Design</topic><topic>Finite element analysis</topic><topic>Fungal infections</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Otorhinolaryngology</topic><topic>Plastic Surgery</topic><topic>Prostheses</topic><topic>Rehabilitation</topic><topic>Simulation</topic><topic>Software</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Manekar, Varsha Sunil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Datarkar, Abhay N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghormode, Ashlesha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daware, Surendra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pandilwar, Prashant</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sapkal, Pranav</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health and Medical</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Manekar, Varsha Sunil</au><au>Datarkar, Abhay N.</au><au>Ghormode, Ashlesha</au><au>Daware, Surendra</au><au>Pandilwar, Prashant</au><au>Sapkal, Pranav</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Two Types of Patient Specific Implants (PSI) and Quad Zygoma Implant (QZI) for Rehabilitation of Post-COVID Maxillary Mucormycosis Defect (PCMMD): Finite Element Analysis</atitle><jtitle>Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery</jtitle><stitle>J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg</stitle><addtitle>J Maxillofac Oral Surg</addtitle><date>2023-09-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>688</spage><epage>694</epage><pages>688-694</pages><issn>0972-8279</issn><eissn>0974-942X</eissn><abstract>Introduction
The residual post-COVID maxillary mucormycosis defect (PCMMD) were extensive, due to unilateral or bilateral maxillectomies. The Goal of rehabilitation of PCMMD is to deliver a prosthetically driven reconstruction. FEA was to evaluate the biomechanical response of PSI struts (PSI 1), PSI Screw retained (PSI 2) and QZI to masticatory load on virtual simulation to improve accuracy and enhance the design.
Aim
To validate and compare the Biomechanical benefit of the PSI struts, PSI Screw retained, QZI in a case of rehabilitation of post-COVID maxillary mucormycosis defect (PCMMD) by FEA study.
Methodology
The result of stress to masticatory load on virtual simulation for (1) Maximum and minimum stress (Von Mises stress); (2) the Displacement (in three positions) and (3) the Deformation (Plastic strain) was compared on virtual simulation for PSI 1 and PSI 2 and QZI.
Conclusion
The FEA and comparative evaluation of PSI 1, PSI 2 and QZI showed a good resistance to displacement. The stress and strain values are low and acceptable. In comparison QZI shows more stress in the anterior region.</abstract><cop>New Delhi</cop><pub>Springer India</pub><pmid>37534346</pmid><doi>10.1007/s12663-023-01950-3</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7838-4089</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7019-8329</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9576-6014</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1975-8199</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0972-8279 |
| ispartof | Journal of maxillofacial and oral surgery, 2023-09, Vol.22 (3), p.688-694 |
| issn | 0972-8279 0974-942X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10390377 |
| source | SpringerLink; ProQuest Central (Alumni); ProQuest Central UK/Ireland; PubMed Central; EZB Electronic Journals Library; ProQuest Central |
| subjects | Biomechanics Defects Dental implants Dentistry Design Finite element analysis Fungal infections Medicine Medicine & Public Health Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Original Original Article Otorhinolaryngology Plastic Surgery Prostheses Rehabilitation Simulation Software |
| title | Comparison of Two Types of Patient Specific Implants (PSI) and Quad Zygoma Implant (QZI) for Rehabilitation of Post-COVID Maxillary Mucormycosis Defect (PCMMD): 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=2024-12-17T19%3A38%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Two%20Types%20of%20Patient%20Specific%20Implants%20(PSI)%20and%20Quad%20Zygoma%20Implant%20(QZI)%20for%20Rehabilitation%20of%20Post-COVID%20Maxillary%20Mucormycosis%20Defect%20(PCMMD):%20Finite%20Element%20Analysis&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20maxillofacial%20and%20oral%20surgery&rft.au=Manekar,%20Varsha%20Sunil&rft.date=2023-09-01&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=688&rft.epage=694&rft.pages=688-694&rft.issn=0972-8279&rft.eissn=0974-942X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s12663-023-01950-3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2920433344%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2920433344&rft_id=info:pmid/37534346&rfr_iscdi=true |