Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2013; 07(04): 484-491
DOI: 10.4103/1305-7456.120642
Original Article
Dental Investigation Society

A three - dimensional finite element study on the stress distribution pattern of two prosthetic abutments for external hexagon implants

Wagner Moreira
1   Department of Prosthodontics, Latin American Institute of Dental Research and Education, ILAPEO, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
2   PhD Student, São Leopoldo Mandic College, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Caio Hermann
1   Department of Prosthodontics, Latin American Institute of Dental Research and Education, ILAPEO, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
,
Jucélio Tomás Pereira
3   Department of Mechanical Engineering, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
,
Jean Anacleto Balbinoti
3   Department of Mechanical Engineering, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
,
Rodrigo Tiossi
1   Department of Prosthodontics, Latin American Institute of Dental Research and Education, ILAPEO, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
4   Department of Odontotécnica, Niterói School of Dentistry, Fluminense Federal University, Niterói, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
26 September 2019 (online)

  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the mechanical behavior of two different straight prosthetic abutments (one- and two-piece) for external hex butt-joint connection implants using three-dimensional finite element analysis (3D-FEA). Materials and Methods: Two 3D-FEA models were designed, one for the two-piece prosthetic abutment (2 mm in height, two-piece mini-conical abutment, Neodent) and another one for the one-piece abutment (2 mm in height, Slim Fit one-piece mini-conical abutment, Neodent), with their corresponding screws and implants (Titamax Ti, 3.75 diameter by 13 mm in length, Neodent). The model simulated the single restoration of a lower premolar using data from a computerized tomography of a mandible. The preload (20 N) after torque application for installation of the abutment and an occlusal loading were simulated. The occlusal load was simulated using average physiological bite force and direction (114.6 N in the axial direction, 17.1 N in the lingual direction and 23.4 N toward the mesial at an angle of 75° to the occlusal plan). Results: The regions with the highest von Mises stress results were at the bottom of the initial two threads of both prosthetic abutments that were tested. The one-piece prosthetic abutment presented a more homogeneous behavior of stress distribution when compared with the two-piece abutment. Conclusions: Under the simulated chewing loads, the von Mises stresses for both tested prosthetic-abutments were within the tensile strength values of the materials analyzed which thus supports the clinical use of both prosthetic abutments.

Key words:

Dental implant-abutment interface - dental implants - finite element analysis - platform switching
 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Brånemark PI. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg 1981; 10: 387-416
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Balshi TJ, Hernandez RE, Pryszlak MC, Rangert B. A comparative study of one implant versus two replacing a single molar. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1996; 11: 372-8
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Buser D, Belser UC, Lang NP. The original one-stage dental implant system and its clinical application. Periodontol 2000 1998; 17: 106-18
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Cehreli M, Duyck J, De Cooman M, Puers R, Naert I. Implant design and interface force transfer. A photoelastic and strain-gauge analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004; 15: 249-57
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Brunski JB. Biomaterials and biomechanics in dental implant design. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988; 3: 85-97
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Geng JP, Tan KB, Liu GR. Application of finite element analysis in implant dentistry: A review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2001; 85: 585-98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Akça K, Cehreli MC, Iplikçioðlu H. Evaluation of the mechanical characteristics of the implant-abutment complex of a reduced-diameter morse-taper implant. A nonlinear finite element stress analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2003; 14: 444-54
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Cehreli MC, Akça K, Iplikçioðlu H, Sahin S. Dynamic fatigue resistance of implant-abutment junction in an internally notched morse-taper oral implant: Influence of abutment design. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004; 15: 459-65
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Lazzara RJ, Porter SS. Platform switching: A new concept in implant dentistry for controlling postrestorative crestal bone levels. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2006; 26: 9-17
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Teixeira ER, Sato Y, Akagawa Y, Shindoi N. A comparative evaluation of mandibular finite element models with different lengths and elements for implant biomechanics. J Oral Rehabil 1998; 25: 299-303
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Kao HC, Gung YW, Chung TF, Hsu ML. The influence of abutment angulation on micromotion level for immediately loaded dental implants: A 3-D finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008; 23: 623-30
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Zachrisson H, Engström E, Engvall J, Wigström L, Smedby O, Persson A. Soft tissue discrimination ex vivo by dual energy computed tomography. Eur J Radiol 2010; 75: e124-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Alkan I, Sertgöz A, Ekici B. Influence of occlusal forces on stress distribution in preloaded dental implant screws. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 91: 319-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Parmley RO. Standard Handbook of Fastening and Joining. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1997
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Bozkaya D, Muftu S, Muftu A. Evaluation of load transfer characteristics of five different implants in compact bone at different load levels by finite elements analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 92: 523-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Niinomi M. Mechanical properties of biomedical titanium alloys. Mater Sci Eng A 1998; 243: 231-6
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Geetha M, Singh AK, Asokamani R, Gogia AK. Ti based biomaterials, the ultimate choice for orthopaedic implants: A review. Prog Mater Sci 2009; 54: 397-425
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Chun HJ, Shin HS, Han CH, Lee SH. Influence of implant abutment type on stress distribution in bone under various loading conditions using finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006; 21: 195-202
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Himmlová L, Dostálová T, Kácovský A, Konvicková S. Influence of implant length and diameter on stress distribution: A finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 91: 20-5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Kong L, Hu K, Li D, Song Y, Yang J, Wu Z. et al. Evaluation of the cylinder implant thread height and width: A 3-dimensional finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008; 23: 65-74
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Quaresma SE, Cury PR, Sendyk WR, Sendyk C. A finite element analysis of two different dental implants: Stress distribution in the prosthesis, abutment, implant, and supporting bone. J Oral Implantol 2008; 34: 1-6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Pessoa RS, Muraru L, Júnior EM, Vaz LG, Sloten JV, Duyck J. et al. Influence of implant connection type on the biomechanical environment of immediately placed implants-CT-based nonlinear, three-dimensional finite element analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2010; 12: 219-34
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Wang RF, Kang B, Lang LA, Razzoog ME. The dynamic natures of implant loading. J Prosthet Dent 2009; 101: 359-71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Cehreli MC, Akça K, Iplikçioðlu H. Force transmission of one-and two-piece morse-taper oral implants: A nonlinear finite element analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004; 15: 481-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Lan TH, Huang HL, Wu JH, Lee HE, Wang CH. Stress analysis of different angulations of implant installation: The finite element method. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2008; 24: 138-43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Saidin S, Abdul Kadir MR, Sulaiman E, Abu Kasim NH. Effects of different implant-abutment connections on micromotion and stress distribution: Prediction of microgap formation. J Dent 2012; 40: 467-74
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Eskitascioglu G, Usumez A, Sevimay M, Soykan E, Unsal E. The influence of occlusal loading location on stresses transferred to implant-supported prostheses and supporting bone: A three-dimensional finite element study. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 91: 144-50
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Saab XE, Griggs JA, Powers JM, Engelmeier RL. Effect of abutment angulation on the strain on the bone around an implant in the anterior maxilla: A finite element study. J Prosthet Dent 2007; 97: 85-92
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar