Cargando…

Comparative evaluation of peri-implant stress distribution in implant protected occlusion and cuspally loaded occlusion on a 3 unit implant supported fixed partial denture: A 3D finite element analysis study

PURPOSE: To assess peri-implant stress distribution using finite element analysis in implant supported fixed partial denture with occlusal schemes of cuspally loaded occlusion and implant protected occlusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 3-D finite element model of mandible with D2 bone with partially e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Acharya, Paramba Hitendrabhai, Patel, Vilas Valjibhai, Duseja, Sareen Subhash, Chauhan, Vishal Rajendrabhai
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8110741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34025956
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2021.13.2.79
_version_ 1783690353344249856
author Acharya, Paramba Hitendrabhai
Patel, Vilas Valjibhai
Duseja, Sareen Subhash
Chauhan, Vishal Rajendrabhai
author_facet Acharya, Paramba Hitendrabhai
Patel, Vilas Valjibhai
Duseja, Sareen Subhash
Chauhan, Vishal Rajendrabhai
author_sort Acharya, Paramba Hitendrabhai
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To assess peri-implant stress distribution using finite element analysis in implant supported fixed partial denture with occlusal schemes of cuspally loaded occlusion and implant protected occlusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 3-D finite element model of mandible with D2 bone with partially edentulism with unilateral distal extension was made. Two Ti alloy identical implants with 4.2 mm diameter and 10 mm length were placed in the mandibular second premolar and the mandibular second molar region and prosthesis was given with the mandibular first molar pontic. Vertical load of 100 N and and oblique load of 70 N was applied on occlusal surface of prosthesis. Group 1 was cuspally loaded occlusion with total 8 contact points and Group 2 was implant protected occlusion with 3 contact points. RESULTS: In Group 1 for vertical load , maximum stress was generated over implant having 14.3552 Mpa. While for oblique load, overall stress generated was 28.0732 Mpa. In Group 2 for vertical load, maximum stress was generated over crown and overall stress was 16.7682 Mpa. But for oblique load, crown stress and overall stress was maximum 22.7561 Mpa. When Group 1 is compared to Group 2, harmful oblique load caused maximum overall stress 28.0732 Mpa in Group 1. CONCLUSION: In Group 1, vertical load generated high implant stress, and oblique load generated high overall stresses, cortical stresses and crown stresses compared to vertical load. In Group 2, oblique load generated more overall stresses, cortical stresses, and crown stresses compared to vertical load. Implant protected occlusion generated lesser harmful oblique implant, crown, bone and overall stresses compared to cuspally loaded occlusion.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8110741
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81107412021-05-21 Comparative evaluation of peri-implant stress distribution in implant protected occlusion and cuspally loaded occlusion on a 3 unit implant supported fixed partial denture: A 3D finite element analysis study Acharya, Paramba Hitendrabhai Patel, Vilas Valjibhai Duseja, Sareen Subhash Chauhan, Vishal Rajendrabhai J Adv Prosthodont Original Article PURPOSE: To assess peri-implant stress distribution using finite element analysis in implant supported fixed partial denture with occlusal schemes of cuspally loaded occlusion and implant protected occlusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 3-D finite element model of mandible with D2 bone with partially edentulism with unilateral distal extension was made. Two Ti alloy identical implants with 4.2 mm diameter and 10 mm length were placed in the mandibular second premolar and the mandibular second molar region and prosthesis was given with the mandibular first molar pontic. Vertical load of 100 N and and oblique load of 70 N was applied on occlusal surface of prosthesis. Group 1 was cuspally loaded occlusion with total 8 contact points and Group 2 was implant protected occlusion with 3 contact points. RESULTS: In Group 1 for vertical load , maximum stress was generated over implant having 14.3552 Mpa. While for oblique load, overall stress generated was 28.0732 Mpa. In Group 2 for vertical load, maximum stress was generated over crown and overall stress was 16.7682 Mpa. But for oblique load, crown stress and overall stress was maximum 22.7561 Mpa. When Group 1 is compared to Group 2, harmful oblique load caused maximum overall stress 28.0732 Mpa in Group 1. CONCLUSION: In Group 1, vertical load generated high implant stress, and oblique load generated high overall stresses, cortical stresses and crown stresses compared to vertical load. In Group 2, oblique load generated more overall stresses, cortical stresses, and crown stresses compared to vertical load. Implant protected occlusion generated lesser harmful oblique implant, crown, bone and overall stresses compared to cuspally loaded occlusion. The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics 2021-04 2021-04-27 /pmc/articles/PMC8110741/ /pubmed/34025956 http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2021.13.2.79 Text en © 2021 The Korean Academy of Prosthodontics https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Acharya, Paramba Hitendrabhai
Patel, Vilas Valjibhai
Duseja, Sareen Subhash
Chauhan, Vishal Rajendrabhai
Comparative evaluation of peri-implant stress distribution in implant protected occlusion and cuspally loaded occlusion on a 3 unit implant supported fixed partial denture: A 3D finite element analysis study
title Comparative evaluation of peri-implant stress distribution in implant protected occlusion and cuspally loaded occlusion on a 3 unit implant supported fixed partial denture: A 3D finite element analysis study
title_full Comparative evaluation of peri-implant stress distribution in implant protected occlusion and cuspally loaded occlusion on a 3 unit implant supported fixed partial denture: A 3D finite element analysis study
title_fullStr Comparative evaluation of peri-implant stress distribution in implant protected occlusion and cuspally loaded occlusion on a 3 unit implant supported fixed partial denture: A 3D finite element analysis study
title_full_unstemmed Comparative evaluation of peri-implant stress distribution in implant protected occlusion and cuspally loaded occlusion on a 3 unit implant supported fixed partial denture: A 3D finite element analysis study
title_short Comparative evaluation of peri-implant stress distribution in implant protected occlusion and cuspally loaded occlusion on a 3 unit implant supported fixed partial denture: A 3D finite element analysis study
title_sort comparative evaluation of peri-implant stress distribution in implant protected occlusion and cuspally loaded occlusion on a 3 unit implant supported fixed partial denture: a 3d finite element analysis study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8110741/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34025956
http://dx.doi.org/10.4047/jap.2021.13.2.79
work_keys_str_mv AT acharyaparambahitendrabhai comparativeevaluationofperiimplantstressdistributioninimplantprotectedocclusionandcuspallyloadedocclusionona3unitimplantsupportedfixedpartialdenturea3dfiniteelementanalysisstudy
AT patelvilasvaljibhai comparativeevaluationofperiimplantstressdistributioninimplantprotectedocclusionandcuspallyloadedocclusionona3unitimplantsupportedfixedpartialdenturea3dfiniteelementanalysisstudy
AT dusejasareensubhash comparativeevaluationofperiimplantstressdistributioninimplantprotectedocclusionandcuspallyloadedocclusionona3unitimplantsupportedfixedpartialdenturea3dfiniteelementanalysisstudy
AT chauhanvishalrajendrabhai comparativeevaluationofperiimplantstressdistributioninimplantprotectedocclusionandcuspallyloadedocclusionona3unitimplantsupportedfixedpartialdenturea3dfiniteelementanalysisstudy