Cargando…

Biomechanical Comparison of Asymmetric Implant Configurations for All-on-Four Treatment Using Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis

SIMPLE SUMMARY: The all-on-four concept, in which two implants are placed vertically in the anterior region and two at an angle in the posterior region, reduces the need for multi-stage surgical procedures while successfully rehabilitating complete edentulism. The aim of this study is to examine the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gönül, Onur, Çicek, Ahmet, Afat, İbrahim Murat, Akdoğan, Emine Tuna, Atalı, Onur
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9783018/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36556328
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life12121963
_version_ 1784857477375852544
author Gönül, Onur
Çicek, Ahmet
Afat, İbrahim Murat
Akdoğan, Emine Tuna
Atalı, Onur
author_facet Gönül, Onur
Çicek, Ahmet
Afat, İbrahim Murat
Akdoğan, Emine Tuna
Atalı, Onur
author_sort Gönül, Onur
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: The all-on-four concept, in which two implants are placed vertically in the anterior region and two at an angle in the posterior region, reduces the need for multi-stage surgical procedures while successfully rehabilitating complete edentulism. The aim of this study is to examine the effect of unilaterally more posterior placement of implants applied according to the all-on-four concept on the stress distribution on bone, implants and other prosthetic components, using the finite element analysis method. Findings of this study suggest that placing the implant further posterior to first molar region may prevent the bone resorption that occurs with high stress around the crestal bone. However, increased stress on the implants and prosthetic parts may lead to failures. ABSTRACT: The aim of this study is to examine the effect of unilaterally more posterior placement of implants (Straumann BLT 4.1 mm in diameter and 12 mm long) applied according to the all-on-four concept on the stress distribution on bone, implants, and other prosthetic components, using the finite element analysis method. Three scenarios were modelled: For Model 1 (M1), anterior implants were placed symmetrically perpendicular to the bone in the right and left lateral incisor region, while the necks of the posterior implants placed symmetrically in the second premolar region were angled at 30 degrees. For Model 2 (M2) the implant in the left second premolar region was placed to the first molar region unilaterally. For Model 3 (M3) the implant in the left lateral incisor region was placed to the canine region unilaterally. Vertical and oblique forces (100 N) were applied in the right first molar region. The von Mises and maximum (Pmax) and minimum (Pmin) principal stresses were obtained. The highest stress concentration on the cortical bone was observed in the second premolar region in all models when oblique forces were applied. M1 was highest (8.992 MPa) followed closely by M3 (8.780 MPa) and M2 was lowest (3.692 MPa). The highest stress concentration on the prosthetic parts was observed in this framework when oblique forces were applied. M2 was highest (621.43 MPa) followed by M3 (409.16 MPa) and the lowest was M1 (309.43 MPa). It is thought that placing the implant further posterior to first molar region may prevent the bone resorption that occurs with high stress around the crestal bone. However, increased stress on the implants and prosthetic parts may lead to failures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9783018
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97830182022-12-24 Biomechanical Comparison of Asymmetric Implant Configurations for All-on-Four Treatment Using Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis Gönül, Onur Çicek, Ahmet Afat, İbrahim Murat Akdoğan, Emine Tuna Atalı, Onur Life (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: The all-on-four concept, in which two implants are placed vertically in the anterior region and two at an angle in the posterior region, reduces the need for multi-stage surgical procedures while successfully rehabilitating complete edentulism. The aim of this study is to examine the effect of unilaterally more posterior placement of implants applied according to the all-on-four concept on the stress distribution on bone, implants and other prosthetic components, using the finite element analysis method. Findings of this study suggest that placing the implant further posterior to first molar region may prevent the bone resorption that occurs with high stress around the crestal bone. However, increased stress on the implants and prosthetic parts may lead to failures. ABSTRACT: The aim of this study is to examine the effect of unilaterally more posterior placement of implants (Straumann BLT 4.1 mm in diameter and 12 mm long) applied according to the all-on-four concept on the stress distribution on bone, implants, and other prosthetic components, using the finite element analysis method. Three scenarios were modelled: For Model 1 (M1), anterior implants were placed symmetrically perpendicular to the bone in the right and left lateral incisor region, while the necks of the posterior implants placed symmetrically in the second premolar region were angled at 30 degrees. For Model 2 (M2) the implant in the left second premolar region was placed to the first molar region unilaterally. For Model 3 (M3) the implant in the left lateral incisor region was placed to the canine region unilaterally. Vertical and oblique forces (100 N) were applied in the right first molar region. The von Mises and maximum (Pmax) and minimum (Pmin) principal stresses were obtained. The highest stress concentration on the cortical bone was observed in the second premolar region in all models when oblique forces were applied. M1 was highest (8.992 MPa) followed closely by M3 (8.780 MPa) and M2 was lowest (3.692 MPa). The highest stress concentration on the prosthetic parts was observed in this framework when oblique forces were applied. M2 was highest (621.43 MPa) followed by M3 (409.16 MPa) and the lowest was M1 (309.43 MPa). It is thought that placing the implant further posterior to first molar region may prevent the bone resorption that occurs with high stress around the crestal bone. However, increased stress on the implants and prosthetic parts may lead to failures. MDPI 2022-11-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9783018/ /pubmed/36556328 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life12121963 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Gönül, Onur
Çicek, Ahmet
Afat, İbrahim Murat
Akdoğan, Emine Tuna
Atalı, Onur
Biomechanical Comparison of Asymmetric Implant Configurations for All-on-Four Treatment Using Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis
title Biomechanical Comparison of Asymmetric Implant Configurations for All-on-Four Treatment Using Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis
title_full Biomechanical Comparison of Asymmetric Implant Configurations for All-on-Four Treatment Using Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis
title_fullStr Biomechanical Comparison of Asymmetric Implant Configurations for All-on-Four Treatment Using Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical Comparison of Asymmetric Implant Configurations for All-on-Four Treatment Using Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis
title_short Biomechanical Comparison of Asymmetric Implant Configurations for All-on-Four Treatment Using Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis
title_sort biomechanical comparison of asymmetric implant configurations for all-on-four treatment using three-dimensional finite element analysis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9783018/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36556328
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/life12121963
work_keys_str_mv AT gonulonur biomechanicalcomparisonofasymmetricimplantconfigurationsforallonfourtreatmentusingthreedimensionalfiniteelementanalysis
AT cicekahmet biomechanicalcomparisonofasymmetricimplantconfigurationsforallonfourtreatmentusingthreedimensionalfiniteelementanalysis
AT afatibrahimmurat biomechanicalcomparisonofasymmetricimplantconfigurationsforallonfourtreatmentusingthreedimensionalfiniteelementanalysis
AT akdoganeminetuna biomechanicalcomparisonofasymmetricimplantconfigurationsforallonfourtreatmentusingthreedimensionalfiniteelementanalysis
AT atalıonur biomechanicalcomparisonofasymmetricimplantconfigurationsforallonfourtreatmentusingthreedimensionalfiniteelementanalysis