» Articles » PMID: 39749100

Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Different Connector Designs for All-Ceramic Implant-Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses

Overview
Publisher Unknown
Date 2025 Jan 3
PMID 39749100
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

All-ceramic fixed dental prostheses (FDPs) tend to fracture at the connector regions due to high stress concentration at these areas influenced by their design. This study was performed as an adjunct to an existing clinical study to evaluate the influence of the different radii of curvature of gingival embrasure on the stress distribution of a three-unit all-ceramic implanted supported FDP. Three three-dimensional (3D) models were created by scanning two titanium dental implants, their suitable zirconia abutments, and a patient-retrieved dental prosthesis using a micro-CT scanner. The radius of curvature of the gingival embrasure for the distal connector of the FDP was altered to measure 0.25 mm, 0.50 mm, and 0.75 mm. A finite element analysis (FEA) software (ABAQUS) was used to evaluate the impact of different connector designs on the distribution of stresses. Maximum Principal Stress data was collected from the individual components (veneer, framework, and abutments). The radius of curvature of gingival embrasure had a significant influence on the stress distribution at the assessed components. The tensile peak stresses at all structures were highest in the 0.25 mm model, while the 0.50 mm and 0.75 mm models presented similar values and more uniform stress distribution.

Citing Articles

Mechanisms of Strength Degradation of Dental Zirconia Due to Glazing: Dependence on Glaze Thickness.

Nonaka K, Teramae M, Pezzotti G Materials (Basel). 2025; 18(3).

PMID: 39942349 PMC: 11820251. DOI: 10.3390/ma18030684.

References
1.
Gherlone E, Cappare P, Pasciuta R, Grusovin M, Mancini N, Burioni R . Evaluation of resistance against bacterial microleakage of a new conical implant-abutment connection versus conventional connections: an in vitro study. New Microbiol. 2016; 39(1):49-56. View

2.
Kelly J, Benetti P . Ceramic materials in dentistry: historical evolution and current practice. Aust Dent J. 2011; 56 Suppl 1:84-96. DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01299.x. View

3.
Pjetursson B, Heimisdottir K . Dental implants - are they better than natural teeth?. Eur J Oral Sci. 2018; 126 Suppl 1:81-87. DOI: 10.1111/eos.12543. View

4.
Sailer I, Balmer M, Husler J, Hammerle C, Kanel S, Thoma D . 10-year randomized trial (RCT) of zirconia-ceramic and metal-ceramic fixed dental prostheses. J Dent. 2018; 76:32-39. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2018.05.015. View

5.
Gherlone E, Ferrini F, Crespi R, Gastaldi G, Cappare P . Digital impressions for fabrication of definitive "all-on-four" restorations. Implant Dent. 2015; 24(1):125-9. DOI: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000206. View