BIOMECHANICAL EVALUATION OF SCREW- AND CEMENT-RETAINED IMPLANT-SUPPORTED PROSTHESES: A NONLINEAR FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

被引:40
作者
Silva, Guilherme Carvalho [1 ]
Cornacchia, Tulimar Machado [1 ]
de Magalhaes, Claudia Silami [1 ]
Bueno, Audrey Cristina [1 ]
Moreira, Allyson Nogueira [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Fed Minas Gerais, Sch Dent, Dept Restorat Dent, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil
关键词
PHOTOELASTIC STRESS-ANALYSIS; FOLLOW-UP; COMPLICATION RATES; DENTAL IMPLANT; IN-VITRO; BONE; RESTORATIONS; SURVIVAL; DENTURES; FORCES;
D O I
10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.06.010
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Statement of problem. The mechanical stability of the prosthetic components in the implant-prosthesis complex is essential to the long-term success of the restorations. However, little is known about the differences in the biomechanical behavior of screw- and cement-retained prostheses. Purpose. The purpose of this study was to compare the preload maintenance, stresses, and displacements of prosthetic components of screw- and cement-retained implant-supported prostheses by using the finite element method in a nonlinear analysis. Material and methods. Two 3-dimensional models were constructed: implant-supported fixed partial prostheses with 3 elements retained either by screws (SFP) or cement (CFP). After the simulation of screw tightening, the preload was calculated for both prostheses. Then vertical and oblique loads (100 N) were applied on the models. The preload was identified, the maximum von Mises equivalent stresses (SEQV) were obtained on the screws, and the displacement among the abutment, the implant, and screw was identified by observing the penetration and gap in the contact interfaces. Results. Under vertical load, there was a higher decrease in the preload and in the SEQV on the screw in the SFP. Under oblique load, the SEQV was 24% higher on the screw of the SFP. In the displacement analysis under vertical load, penetration was concentrated in the threads of the screw in the SFP and between the abutment and implant in the CFP. The gap was 118% greater for the SFP and was concentrated on the abutment extension. Under oblique load, the displacement pattern was similar for both prostheses, but with values 66% higher for penetration and 96% higher for gap for the SFP. Conclusions. The SFP showed a higher biomechanical risk of failure than the CFP.
引用
收藏
页码:1479 / 1488
页数:10
相关论文
共 44 条
[1]   Effects of prosthesis design and impression techniques on human cortical bone strain around oral implants under load [J].
Akca, Kivanc ;
Kokat, Ali Murat ;
Sahin, Saime ;
Iplikcioglu, Haldun ;
Cehreli, Murat Cavit .
MEDICAL ENGINEERING & PHYSICS, 2009, 31 (07) :758-763
[2]   Influence of occlusal forces on stress distribution in preloaded dental implant screws [J].
Alkan, I ;
Sertgöz, A ;
Ekici, E .
JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2004, 91 (04) :319-325
[3]  
Assenza Bartolomeo, 2005, J Oral Implantol, V31, P242, DOI 10.1563/1548-1336(2005)31[242:SVCRAE]2.0.CO
[4]  
2
[5]   Implant Treatment of Patients with Edentulous Jaws: A 20-Year Follow-Up [J].
Astrand, Per ;
Ahlqvist, Jan ;
Gunne, Johan ;
Nilson, Hans .
CLINICAL IMPLANT DENTISTRY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2008, 10 (04) :207-217
[6]  
BRANEMARK PI, 1977, SCAND J PLAST RECONS, P7
[7]  
Brunski J B, 1999, Adv Dent Res, V13, P99
[8]   Prosthetic outcome of cement-retained implant-supported fixed dental restorations: a systematic review [J].
Chaar, M. S. ;
Att, W. ;
Strub, J. R. .
JOURNAL OF ORAL REHABILITATION, 2011, 38 (09) :697-711
[9]   Photoelastic Analysis of Stresses Transmitted by Universal Cast to Long Abutment on Implant-Supported Single Restorations Under Static Occlusal Loads [J].
de Aguiar, Fabio Afranio, Jr. ;
Tiossi, Rodrigo ;
Macedo, Ana Paula ;
Chiarello de Mattos, Maria da Gloria ;
Ribeiro, Ricardo Faria ;
Silveira Rodrigues, Renata Cristina .
JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 2012, 23 :2019-2023
[10]   Peri-implant bone loss in cement- and screw-retained prostheses: Systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
de Brandao, Marcelo L. ;
Vettore, Mario V. ;
Vidigal Junior, Guaracilei M. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PERIODONTOLOGY, 2013, 40 (03) :287-295