Cargando…
A Finite Element Analysis of Stress Allocation around Three Types of Abutment–Implant Interfaces
OBJECTIVES: This study examined the effects of stress distribution at three abutment–implant interfaces on various implant systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Group I: tri-channel internal connection (Nobel Biocare), Group II: 1.5-mm deep internal hex (BioHorizons Co. Birmingham, USA), and Group III: AD...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10485430/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37693997 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_213_23 |
_version_ | 1785102783941181440 |
---|---|
author | Devanna, Raghu Awinashe, Vaibhav Priyadarshi, Siddharth Ramaiah, Vardharajula Venkata Gupta, Aashi Jain, Amol |
author_facet | Devanna, Raghu Awinashe, Vaibhav Priyadarshi, Siddharth Ramaiah, Vardharajula Venkata Gupta, Aashi Jain, Amol |
author_sort | Devanna, Raghu |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: This study examined the effects of stress distribution at three abutment–implant interfaces on various implant systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Group I: tri-channel internal connection (Nobel Biocare), Group II: 1.5-mm deep internal hex (BioHorizons Co. Birmingham, USA), and Group III: ADIN Touareg, to create computerized models of implants and mandibular modeling software, close fit WP, ANSYS Version 14.0 for finite element analysis (FEA), Hypermesh 12 for meshing and CATIA were used. A top-notch scanner was used to scan the implant. CATIA software created computerized models using all the aforementioned data. By applying bonded state on the abutment–implant borders and four various load conditions within the implant system, finite element method modeling was carried out. The computerized model was imported into the ANSYS program. To compare the groups, a statistical analysis was conducted. RESULT: Through the use of three-dimensional FEA, the samples were assessed. Stress was found to be utmost in Group I, followed by Group III and Group II, at 80 N, 80 N with a 15° tilt, 250 N, and 250 N with a 15° tilt, and the divergence was statistically inconsequential. CONCLUSION: The tri-channel internal connection displayed the highest stresses compared to the internal hex within the constraints of the current study. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10485430 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer - Medknow |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104854302023-09-09 A Finite Element Analysis of Stress Allocation around Three Types of Abutment–Implant Interfaces Devanna, Raghu Awinashe, Vaibhav Priyadarshi, Siddharth Ramaiah, Vardharajula Venkata Gupta, Aashi Jain, Amol J Pharm Bioallied Sci Original Article OBJECTIVES: This study examined the effects of stress distribution at three abutment–implant interfaces on various implant systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Group I: tri-channel internal connection (Nobel Biocare), Group II: 1.5-mm deep internal hex (BioHorizons Co. Birmingham, USA), and Group III: ADIN Touareg, to create computerized models of implants and mandibular modeling software, close fit WP, ANSYS Version 14.0 for finite element analysis (FEA), Hypermesh 12 for meshing and CATIA were used. A top-notch scanner was used to scan the implant. CATIA software created computerized models using all the aforementioned data. By applying bonded state on the abutment–implant borders and four various load conditions within the implant system, finite element method modeling was carried out. The computerized model was imported into the ANSYS program. To compare the groups, a statistical analysis was conducted. RESULT: Through the use of three-dimensional FEA, the samples were assessed. Stress was found to be utmost in Group I, followed by Group III and Group II, at 80 N, 80 N with a 15° tilt, 250 N, and 250 N with a 15° tilt, and the divergence was statistically inconsequential. CONCLUSION: The tri-channel internal connection displayed the highest stresses compared to the internal hex within the constraints of the current study. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2023-07 2023-04-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10485430/ /pubmed/37693997 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_213_23 Text en Copyright: © 2023 Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Devanna, Raghu Awinashe, Vaibhav Priyadarshi, Siddharth Ramaiah, Vardharajula Venkata Gupta, Aashi Jain, Amol A Finite Element Analysis of Stress Allocation around Three Types of Abutment–Implant Interfaces |
title | A Finite Element Analysis of Stress Allocation around Three Types of Abutment–Implant Interfaces |
title_full | A Finite Element Analysis of Stress Allocation around Three Types of Abutment–Implant Interfaces |
title_fullStr | A Finite Element Analysis of Stress Allocation around Three Types of Abutment–Implant Interfaces |
title_full_unstemmed | A Finite Element Analysis of Stress Allocation around Three Types of Abutment–Implant Interfaces |
title_short | A Finite Element Analysis of Stress Allocation around Three Types of Abutment–Implant Interfaces |
title_sort | finite element analysis of stress allocation around three types of abutment–implant interfaces |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10485430/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37693997 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_213_23 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT devannaraghu afiniteelementanalysisofstressallocationaroundthreetypesofabutmentimplantinterfaces AT awinashevaibhav afiniteelementanalysisofstressallocationaroundthreetypesofabutmentimplantinterfaces AT priyadarshisiddharth afiniteelementanalysisofstressallocationaroundthreetypesofabutmentimplantinterfaces AT ramaiahvardharajulavenkata afiniteelementanalysisofstressallocationaroundthreetypesofabutmentimplantinterfaces AT guptaaashi afiniteelementanalysisofstressallocationaroundthreetypesofabutmentimplantinterfaces AT jainamol afiniteelementanalysisofstressallocationaroundthreetypesofabutmentimplantinterfaces AT devannaraghu finiteelementanalysisofstressallocationaroundthreetypesofabutmentimplantinterfaces AT awinashevaibhav finiteelementanalysisofstressallocationaroundthreetypesofabutmentimplantinterfaces AT priyadarshisiddharth finiteelementanalysisofstressallocationaroundthreetypesofabutmentimplantinterfaces AT ramaiahvardharajulavenkata finiteelementanalysisofstressallocationaroundthreetypesofabutmentimplantinterfaces AT guptaaashi finiteelementanalysisofstressallocationaroundthreetypesofabutmentimplantinterfaces AT jainamol finiteelementanalysisofstressallocationaroundthreetypesofabutmentimplantinterfaces |