Keywords
Biomechanics
Finite element analysis
How to Cite
Copyright © | All rights reserved.
The journal holds the exclusive copyright for the publication of this article under the terms of Brazilian law 9610/98.
Partial reproduction
The use of parts of the texts, figures and questionnaire of the article is free, being mandatory the citation of the authors and journal.
Total reproduction
It is expressly prohibited and must be authorized by the journal.
Abstract
Objective: Evaluation of biomechanical behavior of bone, implants, and prosthetic components in full-arch implant-supported prostheses made of different materials for the rehabilitation of an atrophic mandible. Methods: Two mandibular models with four implants each were developed. The MPm (metal–plastic model) prosthesis was fabricated with a nickel–chromium framework and acrylic resin, while the ZIm (zirconia model) prosthesis was entirely made of zirconia. Titanium components were used in both models. An occlusal load of 600 N was applied, and finite element analysis (FEA) was performed. Results: Principal stresses were analyzed in bone, and von Mises equivalent stresses in implants and components. The von Mises stress (MPa) ranged from 195.44 (ZIm) to 295.8 (MPm) in implants, and from 81.48 MPa in the prosthesis screw (ZIm) to 278.82 MPa in the abutment screw (MPm). Minimum principal stresses (MPa) in cortical bone varied from –32.56 (MPm) to –27.99 (ZIm), and in cancellous bone from –5.59 (ZIm) to –3.70 (MPm). Conclusion: Prosthesis material affects stress distribution on implants and components. No model exhibited harmful stress to bone tissue. The zirconia model (ZIm) demonstrated favorable biomechanical performance and is a viable option for prosthetic rehabilitation of atrophic mandibles.
References
ALVAREZ-ARENAL A, et al. Should oral implants be splinted in a mandibular implant-supported fixed complete denture? A 3-dimensional-model finite element analysis, The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2014; 112(3).
AMORIM VASCO MA, et al. Utilização de tomografias computadorizadas de baixa resolução para construção de modelos geométricos detalhados de mandíbulas com e sem dentes, Revista Internacional de Métodos Numéricos para Cálculo y Diseño en Ingeniería, 2016; 32(1).
BAGGI L, et al. The influence of implant diameter and length on stress distribution of osseointegrated implants related to crestal bone geometry: A three-dimensional finite element analysis, The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2008; 100(6).
BENEVIDES F, et al. Stress evaluation of different implant lengths on atrophic edentulous mandibles with fixed full-arch implant-supported prosthesis: a finite element analysis, Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, 2020; 24(4).
BHERING CLB, et al. Comparison between all-on-four and all-on-six treatment concepts and framework material on stress distribution in atrophic maxilla: A prototyping guided 3D-FEA study, Materials Science and Engineering C, 2016; 69.
BRÅNEMARK PI, et al. Osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Experience from a 10-year period, Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 1977; 16(S).
ÇALIŞKAN A, YÖNDEM İ. Stress Analysis of Fixed Dental Prostheses Produced With Different Materials According To The All-On-Four Concept, Journal of Biotechnology and Strategic Health Research, 2019; 3(3).
CHRCANOVIC BR, et al. Morphological variation in dentate and edentulous human mandibles. Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy: SRA, 2011; 33(3).
DE MEDEIROS RA, et al. Stress distribution in fixed mandibular prostheses fabricated by CAD/CAM and conventional techniques: Photoelastic and strain gauge analyses, Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry, 2019; 11(9).
DERYABIN G, GRYBAUSKAS S. Dental implant placement with inferior alveolar nerve repositioning in severely resorbed mandibles: a retrospective multicenter study of implant success and survival rates, and lower lip sensory disturbances, International Journal of Implant Dentistry, 2021; 7(1).
DESAI SR, et al. Three-Dimensional FEA Analysis of the Stress Distribution on Titanium and Graphene Frameworks Supported by 3 or 6-Implant Models, Biomimetics, 2023; 8(15).
FAZI G, et al. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of different implant configurations for a mandibular fixed prosthesis, The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 2011; 26(4).
FERREIRA MB, et al. The role of superstructure material on the stress distribution in mandibular full-arch implant-supported fixed dentures. A CT-based 3D-FEA, Materials Science and Engineering C, 2014; 35(1).
GAO J, et al. The effect of mandibular flexure on the design of implant-supported fixed restorations of different facial types under two loading conditions by three-dimensional finite element analysis, Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, 2022; 10.
GARUTTI FCMB, et al. Analysis of the atrophic mandible rehabilitated with fixed total prosthesis on mono or bicortical implants, Brazilian Dental Journal, 2024; 35.
GRECO GD, et al. Biomechanical analysis of the stresses generated by different disoclusion patterns in an implant-supported mandibular complete denture, Journal of Applied Oral Science, 2009; 17(5).
GUIDA L, et al. Short versus longer implants in sites without the need for bone augmentation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, Materials, 2022; 15(9).
GUIDA L, et al. 6 mm short versus 11 mm long inter-foraminal implants in the full-arch rehabilitation of edentulous non-atrophic mandibles: 5-year results from a multicenter randomized controlled trial, Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2023; 34(2).
HORITA S, et al. Biomechanical analysis of immediately loaded implants according to the “All-on-Four” concept, Journal of Prosthodontic Research, 2017; 61(2).
JENSEN OE, NOCK D. Inferior alveolar nerve repositioning in conjunction with placement of osseointegrated implants: A case report, Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, 1987; 63(3).
KARAAGAÇLIOGLU L, OZKAN P. Changes in mandibular ridge height in relation to aging and length of edentulism period, The International Journal of Prosthodontics, 1994; 7(4).
LEE KS, et al. Comparative evaluation of a four-implant-supported polyetherketoneketone framework prosthesis: A three-dimensional finite element analysis based on cone beam computed tomography and computer-aided design, The International Journal of Prosthodontics, 2017; 30(6).
LEHMANN RB, et al. Influência da geometria da prótese na distribuição de tensões em implantes dentários, Revista Brasileira de Implantodontia, 2004; 3(16).
MADSEN MJ, et al. Management of atrophic mandible fractures, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Clinics of North America, 2009; 21(2).
MALÓ P, et al. “All-on-Four” immediate-function concept with Brånemark System® implants for completely edentulous mandibles: A retrospective clinical study, Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research, 2003; 5(s1).
MELO J, et al. Evaluation of stress and fatigue on different implant lengths in the rehabilitation of atrophic mandibles with full-arch fixed prosthesis using finite element method, The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 2022; 37(5).
NAINI RB, et al. Tilted or parallel implant placement in the completely edentulous mandible? A three-dimensional finite element analysis, The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 2011; 26(4).
OYAR P, et al. The effect of the design of a mandibular implant-supported zirconia prosthesis on stress distribution, The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2021; 125(3).
PEIXOTO HE, et al. Rehabilitation of the atrophic mandible with short implants in different positions: A finite elements study, Materials Science and Engineering C, 2017; 80.
PELLIZZER EP, et al. Analysis of the biomechanical behavior of short implants: The photo-elasticity method, Materials Science and Engineering C, 2015; 55.
PETRIE CS, WILLIAMS JL. Comparative evaluation of implant designs: influence of diameter, length, and taper on strains in the alveolar crest, Clinical Oral Implants Research, 2005; 16(4).
POLO WCK, et al. Posterior mandibular alveolar distraction osteogenesis utilizing an extraosseous distractor: A prospective study, Journal of Periodontology, 2005; 76(9).
POOVARODOM P, et al. Effect of implant placement depth on bone remodeling on implant-supported single zirconia abutment crown: A 3D finite element study, Journal of Prosthodontic Research, 2023; 67(2).
SIRANDONI D, et al. Effect of different framework materials in implant-supported fixed mandibular prostheses: A finite element analysis, The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 2019; 34(6).
TAKAHASHI T, et al. Influence of number and inclination angle of implants on stress distribution in mandibular cortical bone with All-on-4 concept, Journal of Prosthodontic Research, 2010; 54(4).
TELLEMAN G, et al. A systematic review of the prognosis of short (<10 mm) dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient, Journal of Clinical Periodontology, 2011; 38(7).
TOPCU ERSÖZ MB, MUMCU E. Biomechanical investigation of maxillary implant-supported full-arch prostheses produced with different framework materials: a finite elements study, The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics, 2022; 14(6).
TRIBST JPM, et al. Influence of framework material and posterior implant angulation in full-arch All-on-4 implant-supported prosthesis stress concentration, Dentistry Journal, 2022; 10(1).
YU W, et al. Biomechanical analysis of inclined and cantilever design with different implant framework materials in mandibular complete-arch implant restorations, The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 2022; 127(5).