Cargando…

Stress distribution of complete-arch implant-supported prostheses reinforced with silica-nylon mesh

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the presence of a silica-nylon mesh and two cantilever lengths on the biomechanical behavior of complete-arch implant-supported prostheses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-four (24) complete mandibular arch implant-supported prostheses were divided into 4 groups accordi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Paes-Junior, Tarcisio-José de A., Tribst, João-Paulo-Mendes, Dal Piva, Amanda-Maria-de Oliveira, Amaral, Marina, Borges, Alexandre-Luiz-Souto, Gonçalves, Fernanda-de-Cássia-Papaiz
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medicina Oral S.L. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6894919/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31824598
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.56470
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the presence of a silica-nylon mesh and two cantilever lengths on the biomechanical behavior of complete-arch implant-supported prostheses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-four (24) complete mandibular arch implant-supported prostheses were divided into 4 groups according to the presence of reinforcing mesh (with or without) and the cantilever length (molar – 15 mm or premolar – 5 mm). The specimens were submitted to strain gauge analysis (30-kgf, 10 s) at different points (molar and premolar). Three-dimensional models were created based on the in vitro specimens, and the results in the bone (microstrain), prostheses (tensile stress), implants and prosthetic screws (von-Mises stress) were evaluated using the finite element method (FEM). All materials were considered homogeneous, isotropic and linear. Strain gauge data were submitted to 3-way analysis of variance and the Tukey test (α=.05). FEM results were qualitatively analyzed using colorimetric graphs. RESULTS: The microstrain magnitude for the prostheses with reinforcement was 519.91±359 and 583.33±661 without reinforcement (p=.001). The microstrain values for loading on the molar was 867.49±784 and on the premolar was 235.75±145. FEM corroborated with the in vitro findings for the bone behavior. The load application in the premolar showed reduced stress concentration, and a significant difference was observed between the presence or absence of the reinforcement for the prostheses. CONCLUSIONS: Silica-nylon mesh reduced the peri-implant microstrain and the prosthesis stress regardless of the cantilever extension. For temporary complete-arch implant-supported prostheses, the limitation of the cantilever to the premolar region improves the biomechanical response during load application. Key words:Finite element analysis, biomechanical response, dental implants, prosthetic dentistry.