The effect of implant angulation and splinting on stress distribution in implant body and supporting bone: A finite element analysis

Ebadian Behnaz, Mosharraf Ramin, Samaneh Abbasi, Memar Ardestani Pouya, Farzin Mahmood, Ebadian Behnaz, Mosharraf Ramin, Samaneh Abbasi, Memar Ardestani Pouya, Farzin Mahmood

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of implant crown splinting and the use of angulated abutment on stress distribution in implant body and surrounding bone by three-dimensional finite element analysis.

Materials and methods: For this study, three models with two implants at the site of mandibular right second premolar and first molar were designed (1): Both implants, parallel to adjacent teeth, with straight abutments (2): Anterior implant with 15 mesial angulations and posterior implant were placed parallel to adjacent tooth, (3): Both implants with 15 mesial angulations and parallel to each other with 15° angulated abutments. Restorations were modeled in two shapes (splinted and nonsplinted). Loading in tripod manner as each point 50 N and totally 300 N was applied. Stress distribution in relation to splinting or nonsplinting restorations and angulations was done with ABAQUS6.13.

Results: Splinting the restorations in all situations, led to lower stresses in all implant bodies, cortical bone and spongy bone except for the spongy bone around angulated first molar. Angulated implant in nonsplinted restoration cause lower stresses in implant body and bone but in splinted models more stresses were seen in implant body in comparison with straight abutment (model 2). Stresses in nonsplinted and splinted restorations in cortical bone of angulated molar region were more than what was observed in straight molar implant (model 3).

Conclusion: Implant restorations splinting lead to a better distribution of stresses in implant bodies and bone in comparison with nonsplinted restorations, especially when the load is applied off center to implant body. Angulations of implant can reduce stresses when the application of the load is in the same direction as the implant angulation.

Keywords: Angulated abutment; dental implant; finite element analysis.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: None declared

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Two straight implants
Figure 2
Figure 2
15° angulated premolar implant and molar straight implant
Figure 3
Figure 3
Two 15° angulated implants
Figure 4
Figure 4
Non splinted restorations
Figure 5
Figure 5
Splinted restorations
Figure 6
Figure 6
Tripod loading
Figure 7
Figure 7
S, Mses stress magnitudes (M Pa) in bone (two straight nonsplinted implants)
Figure 8
Figure 8
S, Mses stress magnitudes (M Pa) in bone (2 straight splinted implants)
Figure 9
Figure 9
S, Mses stress magnitudes (M Pa) in implant body, (straight non splinted implants), premolar implant in left side and molar implant in right side
Figure 10
Figure 10
S, Mses stress magnitudes (M Pa) in implant body (straight splinted implants), premolar implant in left side and molar implant in right side
Figure 11
Figure 11
S, Mses stress magnitudes (M Pa) in bone (straight and angulated nonsplinted implants)
Figure 12
Figure 12
S, Mses stress magnitudes (M Pa) in bone (straight and angulated splinted implants
Figure 13
Figure 13
S, Mses stress magnitudes (M Pa) in implant body (straight and angulated nonsplinted implants) pre molar implant in left side and molar implant in right side
Figure 14
Figure 14
S, Mses stress magnitudes (M Pa) in implant body (straight and angulated splinted implants) pre molar implant in left side and molar implant in right side
Figure 15
Figure 15
S, Mses stress magnitudes (M Pa) in bone (two angulated nonsplinted implants)
Figure 16
Figure 16
S, Mses stress in bone (two angulated splinted implants)
Figure 17
Figure 17
S, Mses stress in implant body (two angulated nonsplinted implants), pre molar implant in left side and molar implant in right side
Figure 18
Figure 18
S, Mses stress in implant body (two angulated splinted implants) pre molar implant in left side and molar implant in right side

References

    1. Feitosa PC, de Lima AP, Silva-Concílio LR, Brandt WC, Neves AC. Stability of external and internal implant connections after a fatigue test. Eur J Dent. 2013;7:267–71.
    1. Grossmann Y, Finger IM, Block MS. Indications for splinting implant restorations. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005;63:1642–52.
    1. Guichet DL, Yoshinobu D, Caputo AA. Effect of splinting and interproximal contact tightness on load transfer by implant restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2002;87:528–35.
    1. Wang TM, Leu LJ, Wang J, Lin LD. Effects of prosthesis materials and prosthesis splinting on peri-implant bone stress around implants in poor-quality bone: A numeric analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002;17:231–7.
    1. Naert I, Koutsikakis G, Duyck J, Quirynen M, Jacobs R, van Steenberghe D. Biologic outcome of implant-supported restorations in the treatment of partial edentulism. part I: A longitudinal clinical evaluation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2002;13:381–9.
    1. Naert I, Koutsikakis G, Quirynen M, Duyck J, van Steenberghe D, Jacobs R. Biologic outcome of implant-supported restorations in the treatment of partial edentulism. Part 2: A longitudinal radiographic study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2002;13:390–5.
    1. Sethi A, Kaus T, Sochor P. The use of angulated abutments in implant dentistry: Five-year clinical results of an ongoing prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2000;15:801–10.
    1. Brown SD, Payne AG. Immediately restored single implants in the aesthetic zone of the maxilla using a novel design: 1-year report. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011;22:445–54.
    1. Eger DE, Gunsolley JC, Feldman S. Comparison of angled and standard abutments and their effect on clinical outcomes: A preliminary report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2000;15:819–23.
    1. Graziani F, Donos N, Needleman I, Gabriele M, Tonetti M. Comparison of implant survival following sinus floor augmentation procedures with implants placed in pristine posterior maxillary bone: A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2004;15:677–82.
    1. Basa S, Varol A, Turker N. Alternative bone expansion technique for immediate placement of implants in the edentulous posterior mandibular ridge: A clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2004;19:554–8.
    1. Sethi A, Kaus T, Sochor P, Axmann-Krcmar D, Chanavaz M. Evolution of the concept of angulated abutments in implant dentistry: 14-year clinical data. Implant Dent. 2002;11:41–51.
    1. Dubois G, Daas M, Bonnet AS, Lipinski P. Biomechanical study of a prosthetic solution based on an angled abutment: Case of upper lateral incisor. Med Eng Phys. 2007;29:989–98.
    1. 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.
    1. Hasan I, Röger B, Heinemann F, Keilig L, Bourauel C. Influence of abutment design on the success of immediately loaded dental implants: Experimental and numerical studies. Med Eng Phys. 2012;34:817–25.
    1. Lin CL, Wang JC, Ramp LC, Liu PR. Biomechanical response of implant systems placed in the maxillary posterior region under various conditions of angulation, bone density, and loading. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008;23:57–64.
    1. Clelland NL, Lee JK, Bimbenet OC, Brantley WA. A three-dimensional finite element stress analysis of angled abutments for an implant placed in the anterior maxilla. J Prosthodont. 1995;4:95–100.
    1. 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.
    1. Cavallaro J, Jr, Greenstein G. Angled implant abutments: A practical application of available knowledge. J Am Dent Assoc. 2011;142:150–8.
    1. Watanabe F, Hata Y, Komatsu S, Ramos TC, Fukuda H. Finite element analysis of the influence of implant inclination, loading position, and load direction on stress distribution. Odontology. 2003;91:31–6.
    1. Martini AP, Freitas AC, Jr, Rocha EP, de Almeida EO, Anchieta RB, Kina S, et al. Straight and angulated abutments in platform switching: Influence of loading on bone stress by three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Craniofac Surg. 2012;23:415–8.
    1. Satoh T, Maeda Y, Komiyama Y. Biomechanical rationale for intentionally inclined implants in the posterior mandible using 3D finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2005;20:533–9.
    1. Sevimay M, Usumez A, Eskitascioglu G. The influence of various occlusal materials on stresses transferred to implant-supported prostheses and supporting bone: A finite element analysis. J Biomed Mater Res. 2005;73:140–7.
    1. Nickel JC, McLachlan KR. In vitro measurement of the frictional properties of the temporomandibular joint disc. Arch Oral Biol. 1994;39:323–31.
    1. Geng J, Yan W, Xu W. E book. Berlin: Springer; 2008. Application of the Finite Element Method in Implant Dentistry.
    1. Moreira W, Hermann C, Pereira JT, Balbinoti JA, Tiossi R. A three-dimensional finite element study on the stress distribution pattern of two prosthetic abutments for external hexagon implants. Eur J Dent. 2013;7:484–91.
    1. Lindh T, Gunne J, Tillberg A, Molin M. A meta-analysis of implants in partial edentulism. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1998;9:80–90.
    1. Canay S, Hersek N, Akpinar I, Asik Z. Comparison of stress distribution around vertical and angled implants with finite-element analysis. Quintessence Int. 1996;27:591–8.
    1. Tian K, Chen J, Han L, Yang J, Huang W, Wu D. Angled abutments result in increased or decreased stress on surrounding bone of single-unit dental implants: A finite element analysis. Med Eng Phys. 2012;34:1526–31.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera