Journals / European Oral Research / 2011 / Cilt: 45 - Sayı: 2

THE EFFECT OF CANTILEVERS ON THE STRESS DISTRIBUTION OF THREE IMPLANTS SUPPORTING MANDIBULAR OVERDENTURES

ALT ÇENE ÜÇ İMPLANT DESTEKLİ PROTEZLERDE, KANTİLEVER VARLIĞININ İMPLANTLAR ÜZERİNE GELEN STRES DAĞILIMINA ETKİSİ

Pages
9–17
Publication Date
2011-11-29
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Theresults of our study show that the maximum stress formations were seen on the cortical bone distal to the implant which isnearest to the side where the forces were applied.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Implant therapy is widely used for the treatment of edentulous patients.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In our study we prepared two, three dimentional finite element models representing bar retained overdentureprostheses with 7mm distal extensions and no distal extensions built over 3 implants. 25 N horizontal, 100 N vertical and 103N oblique force were aplied each model.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Theresults of our study show that the maximum stress formations were seen on the cortical bone distal to the implant which isnearest to the side where the forces were applied.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Implant üstü protezler · overdenture · sonlu elemanlar gerilme analizi

Abstract

Implant therapy is widely used for the treatment of edentulous patients. Placing implants to the interforaminal region of anedentulous mandible and constructing overdenture prosthesses is a good alternative. However, there is no consensus on thenumber of the implants and whether or not using distal extensions. For that reason in our study, we tried to find out the effectof implant retained overdenture prosthesses with or without distal extensions on the stress distribution at the implantinterface. In our study we prepared two, three dimentional finite element models representing bar retained overdentureprostheses with 7mm distal extensions and no distal extensions built over 3 implants. 25 N horizontal, 100 N vertical and 103N oblique force were aplied each model. The stresses were investigated using the ANSYS 8.1 workbench programme. Theresults of our study show that the maximum stress formations were seen on the cortical bone distal to the implant which isnearest to the side where the forces were applied.

Özet

Tam dişsiz çenelerin protetik tedavilerinde implant uygulamaları çok sıklıkla kullanılmaktadır. Alt çene total dişsizlik vakalarında interforaminalar bölgesine uygulanan çeşitli sayıda implant üzeri barlı overdenture'lar da bir tedavi alternatifidir. Yapılan implant üstü barlı overdenture protezlerde kullanılacak implant sayısı ve barların distal uzantılarının olup olmaması üzerine hala tam bir görüş birliği yoktur. Çalışmamızda, interforaminal bölgeye 3 adet implant yerleştirilerek yapılan implant üzeri protezlerde, distal uzantılı ve distal uzantısız barlı protezlerin ve sayılarının, implant kemik ara yüzeyindeki stres dağılımına etkisinin incelenmesi amaçlandı. Çalışmamızda 3 adet implant üzerine 7 mm distal uzantılı ve distal uzantısız barlı protezleri temsil eden 2 adet üç boyutlu sonlu elemanlar modeli hazırlandı. Her modele, 25N horizontal, 100 N vertikal, 103 N oblik kuvvet uygulandı. Olusan stresler ANSYS 8.1 Workbench programı ile incelendi. Çalışmamızın sonucuna göre maksimum stres değerleri kuvvetin uygulandığı tarafa en yakın implantın distalindeki kortikal kemikte tespit edildi. Spongioz kemikte belirlenen maksimum stres değerleri ise düşük olup genellikle implantların apeksinde ve implantları çevreleyen kemikte saptandı.

🔖

Cite This Article

SANCAKLI, E., MUMCU, E., GEÇKİLİ, O., AZAK, A. N. (2011). THE EFFECT OF CANTILEVERS ON THE STRESS DISTRIBUTION OF THREE IMPLANTS SUPPORTING MANDIBULAR OVERDENTURES. European Oral Research, Cilt: 45 - Sayı: 2, 9–17. https://ajindex.com/articles/243463

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Naert I, Alsaadi G, van Steenberghe D, Quirynen M. A 10 year randomized clinical trial on the influence of splinted and unsplinted oral implants retaining mandibular overdentures: peri-implant outcome. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004; 19: 695-702. Atmaram GH. Mohammed H. Stress analysis o f single-tooth implants.11. Effect o f root length variation and pseudo periodontal ligament incorporation. Implantologist 1983; 3: 58-62.
  2. Zarb GA, Albrektsson T. Osseointegration: A requiem for the periodontal ligament? (guess editorial) Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1991; 11: 88-91. Mensor M.C. Attachment fixation for overdentures: Part I. J Prosthet Dent 1977; 37: 366-373.
  3. Davis D. M., Zarb G.A., Chao Y. L. Studies on frameworks for osseointegrated prostheses: Part I. The effect o f varying the number o f supporting abutments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1988; 3: 197-201.
  4. Epstein D.D., Epstein P.L., Cohen B. I., Pagnillo M. K. Comparison o f the retentive properties o f six prefabricated post overdenture attachment systems. J Prosthet Dent 1999; 82: 579-584.
  5. Heckmann S.M., Winter W., Meyer M., Weber H.P., Wichmann M.G. Overdenture attachment selection and the loading o f implant and denturebearing area. Part I: I n vivo verification o f stereolithographic model. Clin Oral Impl Res 2001; 12: 617-623.
  6. Stricker A, Gutwald R, Schmeizeisen R, Gellrich NG. •mmediate loading o f 2 interforaminal dental implants supporting an overdenture: clinical and radiographic results after 24 months. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2004; 19: 868-872.
  7. Sadowsky SJ, Caputo A A. Stress transfer o f four mandibular implant overdenture cantilever designs. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92: 328-336.
  8. Batenburg R.H.K., Meijer H.J.A., Raghoebar G.M., Vissink A. Treatment concept for mandibular overdentures supported by endosseous implants: A literature review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998; 13: 539-545.
  9. Jemt T., Book K., Karlsson S. Occlusal force and mandibular movements i n patients with removable overdentures and fixed prostheses supported by implants i n the maxilla. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993; 8: 301-308.
  10. Davodi A., Nishimura R., Beumer J. I I I. A n implant supported fixed-removable prosthesis with a milled tissue bar and hader clip retention as a restorative option for the edentulous maxilla. J Prosthet Dent 1997; 78: 212-217. Brunski JB Biomechanical factors affecting the boneı dental implant interface. Clinical Materials 1992; 153-20.
  11. Haraldson T., K