Palavras-chave
Biomecânica
Análise de elementos finitos
Como Citar
Copyright © | Todos os direitos reservados.
A revista detém os direitos autorais exclusivos de publicação deste artigo nos termos da lei 9610/98.
Reprodução parcial
É livre o uso de partes do texto, figuras e questionário do artigo, sendo obrigatória a citação dos autores e revista.
Reprodução total
É expressamente proibida, devendo ser autorizada pela revista.
Resumo
Objetivo: Avaliar o comportamento biomecânico do osso, implantes e componentes protéticos de próteses protocolo em diferentes materiais, sobre mandíbula atrófica. Métodos: Dois modelos de mandíbula foram criados; e inseridos 4 implantes. A prótese do MPm (modelo metalo-plástico) foi confeccionada com barra de níquel-cromo e resina acrílica; enquanto a do ZIm (modelo em zircônia) foi confeccionada em zircônia. Os componentes protéticos eram em titânio. Foi aplicada uma carga oclusal de 600N nos modelos e prosseguiu-se com a análise de elementos finitos (MEF). Resultados: Foram avaliadas tensões principais em osso, e tensões equivalentes de von Mises para implantes e componentes. As análises de Von Mises (em MPa) apresentaram tensões nos implantes de 195,44 (ZIm) a 295,8 (MPm); ao sistema protético de 81,481 no parafuso de retenção da prótese (ZIm) a 278,82 no parafuso de retenção do pilar (MPm); mínima tensão principal (em MPa) no osso cortical de -32,562 (MPm) a -27,995 (ZIm) e mínima tensão principal sobre o osso medular de -5,5911 (ZIm) a -3,7001 (MPm). Conclusão: O material da prótese influencia a distribuição de tensão nos implantes e seus componentes; nenhum dos modelos apresentou tensão maléfica ao tecido ósso; oZIm mostrou-se biomecanicamente eficaz para confecção de próteses de maxilares atróficos.
Referências
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).