Effect of different design of abutment and implant on stress distribution in 2 implants and peripheral bone: A finite element analysis study

Statement of problem. How adjacent dental implants with different sizes, designs, and abutment connection shapes affect stress on the prosthetic structure is unclear. Purpose. The purpose of this finite element analysis (FEA) study was to analyze stress distribution around bone and around 2 implants with different sizes, diameters, shapes, and loading directions placed next to each other in splinted and unsplinted prostheses. Material and methods. On 3D FEA models representing the posterior right lateral segment of the mandible, 1 implant (empty set3.5x12 mm) and 1 implant (empty set5.5x8 mm) were placed adjacent. Three different contemporary implant models were created with different teeth, pitch, spiral numbers, and self-taping features, and different abutments for them were modeled in 3D. The implant abutment connection was internal hexagonal (MIH), stepped conical (MSC), and internal conical (MIC). Vertical and oblique loads of 365 N for molar teeth and of 200 N for premolar teeth were applied as boundary conditions to the cusp ridges and grooves in a nonlinear FEA. Results. The MIH implants resulted in improved stress conditions. According to the von Mises stresses occurring on the screw, abutment, and implant, especially under oblique loads, MIH was exposed to less stress than MSC, and MSC was exposed to less stress than MIC. Conclusions. When a standard implant and a short implant were placed adjacent and splinted by crowns, the implants, abutments, and screws had unfavorable stress levels; therefore, adjacent splinted implants should be of similar size. The form of the implant-abutment junction is also an important factor affecting stress.