PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate, using finite element analysis, the stress patterns induced in cortical bone by three distinct implant-supported prosthetic designs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The first two models consisted of a prosthesis supported by four implants, the distal two of which were tilted, with different cantilever lengths (5 mm and 15 mm). The third design consisted of a prosthesis supported by five conventionally placed implants and a 15-mm cantilever. RESULTS: In the tilted model with 5-mm cantilever and in the nontilted model, the maximum value of compressive stress (-18 MPa) was found near the cervical area of the distal implant. Higher values for compressive stress were predicted near the cervical area of the distal implant in the tilted model with a 15-mm cantilever, as compared to the tilted model with the 5-mm cantilever. For the tilted model with the 5-mm cantilever, peak values of tensile stress were predicted near the cervical area of both the distal (1.25 MPa) and the mesial implants (2.5 MPa). For the nontilted model, the peak value was found near the cervical area of the in-between implant (5 MPa). For the tilted model with 15-mm cantilever, tensile stress values were higher than in the tilted model with 5-mm cantilever. CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference in stress patterns between the tilted 5-mm and the nontilted 15-mm configuration was predicted. The tilted configuration with a 15-mm cantilever was found to induce higher stress values than the tilted configuration with a 5-mm cantilever.

Comparison of tilted versus nontilted implant-supported prosthetic designs for the restoration of the edentuous mandible: a biomechanical study / C.M. Bellini, D. Romeo, F. Galbusera, S. Taschieri, M.T. Raimondi, A. Zampelis, L. Francetti. - In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS. - ISSN 0882-2786. - 24:3(2009), pp. 511-517.

Comparison of tilted versus nontilted implant-supported prosthetic designs for the restoration of the edentuous mandible: a biomechanical study

D. Romeo;S. Taschieri;L. Francetti
2009

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate, using finite element analysis, the stress patterns induced in cortical bone by three distinct implant-supported prosthetic designs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The first two models consisted of a prosthesis supported by four implants, the distal two of which were tilted, with different cantilever lengths (5 mm and 15 mm). The third design consisted of a prosthesis supported by five conventionally placed implants and a 15-mm cantilever. RESULTS: In the tilted model with 5-mm cantilever and in the nontilted model, the maximum value of compressive stress (-18 MPa) was found near the cervical area of the distal implant. Higher values for compressive stress were predicted near the cervical area of the distal implant in the tilted model with a 15-mm cantilever, as compared to the tilted model with the 5-mm cantilever. For the tilted model with the 5-mm cantilever, peak values of tensile stress were predicted near the cervical area of both the distal (1.25 MPa) and the mesial implants (2.5 MPa). For the nontilted model, the peak value was found near the cervical area of the in-between implant (5 MPa). For the tilted model with 15-mm cantilever, tensile stress values were higher than in the tilted model with 5-mm cantilever. CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference in stress patterns between the tilted 5-mm and the nontilted 15-mm configuration was predicted. The tilted configuration with a 15-mm cantilever was found to induce higher stress values than the tilted configuration with a 5-mm cantilever.
biomechanics; edentulism; finite element analysis; implant-supported prosthesis; tilted implant
Settore MED/28 - Malattie Odontostomatologiche
2009
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/144111
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 13
  • Scopus 74
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 63
social impact