» Articles » PMID: 33149853

Biomechanical Stress and Microgap Analysis of Bone-level and Tissue-level Implant Abutment Structure According to the Five Different Directions of Occlusal Loads

Overview
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2020 Nov 5
PMID 33149853
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The stress distribution and microgap formation on an implant abutment structure was evaluated to determine the relationship between the direction of the load and the stress value.

Materials And Methods: Two types of three-dimensional models for the mandibular first molar were designed: bone-level implant and tissue-level implant. Each group consisted of an implant, surrounding bone, abutment, screw, and crown. Static finite element analysis was simulated through 200 N of occlusal load and preload at five different load directions: 0, 15, 30, 45, and 60°. The von Mises stress of the abutment and implant was evaluated. Microgap formation on the implant-abutment interface was also analyzed.

Results: The stress values in the implant were as follows: 525, 322, 561, 778, and 1150 MPa in a bone level implant, and 254, 182, 259, 364, and 436 MPa in a tissue level implant at a load direction of 0, 15, 30, 45, and 60°, respectively. For microgap formation between the implant and abutment interface, three to seven-micron gaps were observed in the bone level implant under a load at 45 and 60°. In contrast, a three-micron gap was observed in the tissue level implant under a load at only 60°.

Conclusion: The mean stress of bone-level implant showed 2.2 times higher than that of tissue-level implant. When considering the loading point of occlusal surface and the direction of load, higher stress was noted when the vector was from the center of rotation in the implant prostheses.

Citing Articles

A New Multi-Axial Functional Stress Analysis Assessing the Longevity of a Ti-6Al-4V Dental Implant Abutment Screw.

Naguib G, Abougazia A, Al-Turki L, Mously H, Hashem A, Mira A Biomimetics (Basel). 2024; 9(11).

PMID: 39590261 PMC: 11591605. DOI: 10.3390/biomimetics9110689.


Influence of a new abutment design concept on the biomechanics of peri-implant bone, implant components, and microgap formation: a finite element analysis.

Nie H, Tang Y, Yang Y, Wu W, Zhou W, Liu Z BMC Oral Health. 2023; 23(1):277.

PMID: 37170117 PMC: 10176806. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-02989-x.


Application in the analysis of the occlusal force of free-end missing tooth implant restoration with T-SCAN III.

Wu M, Lai P, Cheong F, Zhou W, Xu S, Li H Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2023; 11:1039518.

PMID: 37091346 PMC: 10116052. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1039518.


Fractal Dimension as a Tool for Assessment of Dental Implant Stability-A Scoping Review.

Mishra S, Kumar M, Mishra L, Mohanty R, Nayak R, Das A J Clin Med. 2022; 11(14).

PMID: 35887815 PMC: 9319468. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11144051.

References
1.
Lee H, Park S, Noh G . Biomechanical analysis of 4 types of short dental implants in a resorbed mandible. J Prosthet Dent. 2018; 121(4):659-670. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.07.013. View

2.
Anitua E, Alkhraist M, Pinas L, Begona L, Orive G . Implant survival and crestal bone loss around extra-short implants supporting a fixed denture: the effect of crown height space, crown-to-implant ratio, and offset placement of the prosthesis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014; 29(3):682-9. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.3404. View

3.
Zipprich H, Rathe F, Pinz S, Schlotmann L, Lauer H, Ratka C . Effects of Screw Configuration on the Preload Force of Implant-Abutment Screws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2018; 33(2):e25-e32. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.5837. View

4.
Jorn D, Kohorst P, Besdo S, Rucker M, Stiesch M, Borchers L . Influence of lubricant on screw preload and stresses in a finite element model for a dental implant. J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 112(2):340-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.10.016. View

5.
Faverani L, Ricardo Barao V, Ramalho-Ferreira G, Delben J, Ferreira M, Junior I . The influence of bone quality on the biomechanical behavior of full-arch implant-supported fixed prostheses. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 2014; 37:164-70. DOI: 10.1016/j.msec.2014.01.013. View