BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

THE EVALUTION OF STRESS DISTRIBUTIONS IN 3 AND 5 UNIT DENTAL AND IMPLANT SUPPORTED FIXED ZIRCONIA RESTORATIONS: FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 18 Sayı: 2, 128 - 140, 24.04.2015

Sedat Güven Veysel Eratilla Köksal Beydemir Serkan Dündar

Öz

Purpose: In this study, it is aimed to compare the distribution of stress on anchorage and implants in 3-and-5-member-dental and implant supported zirconia restorations by using finite element analysis.

Material and Method: Stress distribution formed in anchorage and implants as a result of chewing forces was analyzed in dental and implant (Astra Tech Microthread Osseo Speed, Sweeden) supported models of zirconia restoration with 5-member placed on the numbers of 43, 44, 45, 46 and 47 and with 3-member placed on the number of 45, 46 and 47.  The study was performed through static nonlinear analysis with the three-dimensional finite element analysis method.  

Results: The highest and the lowest stress were respectively found on the number of 45 and 47 in 3-member dental supported model. The highest and the lowest stress in 5-membered dental-supported model were respectively found on the tooth of number 45 and on the root apex of the implant of number 43. Stress accumulation was observed in the cervical portion of the implant in implant-supported models. Stress accumulation in the tooth-supported model was found less than in implant-supported models

Conclusion: The extreme forces on the dental and implant-supported restorations with increased members can reduce survival rate of restorations in mouth. To prefer dental implants with larger diameter and longer length along with infrastructure like zirconia to design posterior implant-supported restorations can keep restorations in mouth for longer period. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Finite Element Analysis implant supported prothesis zirconia restorations

Kaynakça

  • Branemark PI, Adell R, Breine U, Hansson BO, Lindstrom J, Ohlsson A. Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses. I. Experimental studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1969;3:81-100.
  • Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, Behneke A, Behneke N, Hirt HP, et al. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:161-172.
  • Christensen GJ. Ceramics vs. porcelain fused to metal crowns: give your patients a choise. J Am Dent Assoc 1994;125:311-312,314.
  • Hansen PA, West LA. Allergic reaction following insertion of a Pd-Cu-Au fixed partial denture: a clinical report. J Prosthodont 1997;6:144-148.
  • Vult von Steyern P, Carlson P, Nilner K. All-ceramic fixed partial dentures designed according to the DC-Zirkon technique. A 2-year clinical study. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32:180-187.
  • Piwowarczyk A, Ottl P, Lauer HC, Kuretzky T. A clinical report and overview of scientific studies and clinical procedures conducted on the 3M ESPE Lava All-Ceramic System. J Prosthodont 2005;14:39-45.
  • Studart AR, Filser F, Kocher P, Luthy H, Gauckler LJ. Cyclic fatigue in water of veneer-framework composites for all-ceramic dental bridges. Dent Mater 2007;23:177-185.
  • Rismanchian M, Shafiei S, Nourbakhshian F, Davoudi A. Flexural strengths of implant-supported zirconia based bridges in posterior regions. J Adv Prosthodont 2014;6:346-350
  • Petrie CS, Williams JL. Comparative evaluation of implant designs: influence of diameter, length, and taper on strains in the alveolar crest. A three-dimensional finite-element analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:486-494.
  • Wheeler RC. An atlas of tooth form. Toronto: Harcourt Canada; 1969.
  • Heravi F, Salari S, Tanbakuchi B, Loh S, Amiri M. Effects of crown-root angle on stress distribution in the maxillary central incisors’ PDL during application of intrusive and retraction forces: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Progress in Orthodontics 2013; 14:26.
  • Covani U, Ricci M, Tonelli P, Barone A. An Evaluation of New Designs in Implant-Abutment Connections: A Finite Element Method Assessment. Implant Dentistry 2013; 22(3):263-267.
  • Baggi L, Cappelloni I, Di Girolamo M, Maceri F, Vairo G. The influence of implant diameter and length on stress distribution of osseointegrated implants related to crestal bone geometry: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;100(6):422-431.
  • Petrie CS, Williams JL. Comparative evaluation of implant designs: influence of diameter, length, and taper on strains in the alveolar crest. A three-dimensional finite-element analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:486-494.
  • İplikçioğlu H, Akça K. Comperative evaluation of the effect of diameter, length and number of implants supporting three unit fixed partial protheses on stress distribution in the bone. Journal of Dentistry 2002;30:41-46.
  • Chou I-C , Lee S-Y, Wu M-C , Sun C-W, Jiang C-P. Finite element modelling of implant designs and cortical bone thickness on stress distribution in maxillary type IV bone. Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering. 2014;17(5):516-526.
  • Geng JP, Tan KB, Liu GR. Application of finite element analysis in implant dentistry: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2001;85:585-598.
  • Teixeira ER, Sato Y, Akagawa Y, Shindoi N. A comparative evaluation of mandibular finite element models with different lengths and elements for implant biomechanics. J Oral Rehabil 1998;25(4):299-303.
  • İsmail YH, Pahountis LN, Fleming JF. Comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional finite element analysis of a blade implant. International Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Implants 1987;4(2), 25-31.
  • Wakabayashi N, Ona M, Suzuki T, Igarashi Y. Nonlinear finite element analyses: advances and challenges in dental applications. J Dent 2008;36:463-471.
  • Lin CL, Wang JC. Nonlinear finite element analysis of a splinted implant with various connectors and occlusal forces. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:331-340.
  • O’Brien W J. Dental materials and their selection, Quintessence Pub Co Inc 2nd Edition,1997.
  • Meijer HJ, Starmans FJ, Bosman F, Steen WH. A comparison of three finite element models of an edentulous mandible provided with implants. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 1993;20(2):147-157.
  • Koyano K, Esaki D. Occlusion on oral implants: current clinical guidelines. J Oral Rehabil 2014 Oct. 6 doi: 10.1111/joor.12239 (Epub ehead of print).
  • Wiskott HW, Belser UC. Lack of integration of smooth titanium surfaces:a working hypothesis based on strains generated in the surrounding bone. Clin Oral Implants Res 1999;10:429-44.
  • Rangert B, Krogh PH, Langer B, Van Roekel N. Bending overload and implant fracture: a retrospective clinical analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:326-334.
  • Misch CE. Contemporaray Implant Dentisrty. Mosby Elsevier 2008;Third edition:337
  • Baggi L, Cappelloni I, Di Girolamo M, Maceri F, Vairo G. The influence of implant diameter and length on stress distribution of osseointegrated implants related to crestal bone geometry: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2008;100:422-431.
  • Winkler S, Morris HF, Ochi S. Implant survival to 36 months as related to length and diameter. Ann Periodontol 2000;5:22-31.
  • Yamanishi Y, Yamaguchi S, Imazato S, Nakano T, Yatani H. Influences of implant neck design and implant-abutment joint type on peri-implant bone stress and abutment micromovement: three-dimensional finite element analysis. Dent Mater. 2012 Nov;28(11):1126-1133.
  • Himmlova L, Dostalova T, Kacovsky A, Konvickova S. Influence of implant length and diameter on stress distribution: a finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2004;91:20-25.
  • de Baat C, van Loveren C, van der Maarel-Wierink CD, Witter DJ, Creugers NH. After care for durability and profitability of single-unit and multi-unit fixed dental prostheses. Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 2013;120(7-8):411-420.
  • Ogawa T, Dhaiwall S, Naert I, Mine A, Konstrom M, Sasaki K, Duyck J. Impact of implant number, distribution and prothesis material on loading on implants supporting fixed prothesis. J Oral Rehabil 2010;37:525-531
  • Sahin S, Cehreli Z, Yalcin E. The influence of functional forces on the biomechanics of implant-supported prothesis: A rewiev. J Dent 2002;30(7-8):271-282.
  • Duyck J, Van Oosterwyck H, Vander Sloten J, De Cooman M, Puers R, Naert I. .Magnitude and distribution of occlusal forces on oral implants supporting fixed prostheses: an in vivo study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000;11(5):465-475.
  • Svensson KG, Trulsson M.Impaired force control during food holding and biting in subjects with tooth- or implant-supported fixed prostheses. J Clin Periodontol. 2011;38(12):1137 1146.

Official Publication of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 18 Sayı: 2, 128 - 140, 24.04.2015

Sedat Güven Veysel Eratilla Köksal Beydemir Serkan Dündar

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Branemark PI, Adell R, Breine U, Hansson BO, Lindstrom J, Ohlsson A. Intra-osseous anchorage of dental prostheses. I. Experimental studies. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1969;3:81-100.
  • Buser D, Mericske-Stern R, Bernard JP, Behneke A, Behneke N, Hirt HP, et al. Long-term evaluation of non-submerged ITI implants. Part 1: 8-year life table analysis of a prospective multi-center study with 2359 implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 1997;8:161-172.
  • Christensen GJ. Ceramics vs. porcelain fused to metal crowns: give your patients a choise. J Am Dent Assoc 1994;125:311-312,314.
  • Hansen PA, West LA. Allergic reaction following insertion of a Pd-Cu-Au fixed partial denture: a clinical report. J Prosthodont 1997;6:144-148.
  • Vult von Steyern P, Carlson P, Nilner K. All-ceramic fixed partial dentures designed according to the DC-Zirkon technique. A 2-year clinical study. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32:180-187.
  • Piwowarczyk A, Ottl P, Lauer HC, Kuretzky T. A clinical report and overview of scientific studies and clinical procedures conducted on the 3M ESPE Lava All-Ceramic System. J Prosthodont 2005;14:39-45.
  • Studart AR, Filser F, Kocher P, Luthy H, Gauckler LJ. Cyclic fatigue in water of veneer-framework composites for all-ceramic dental bridges. Dent Mater 2007;23:177-185.
  • Rismanchian M, Shafiei S, Nourbakhshian F, Davoudi A. Flexural strengths of implant-supported zirconia based bridges in posterior regions. J Adv Prosthodont 2014;6:346-350
  • Petrie CS, Williams JL. Comparative evaluation of implant designs: influence of diameter, length, and taper on strains in the alveolar crest. A three-dimensional finite-element analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:486-494.
  • Wheeler RC. An atlas of tooth form. Toronto: Harcourt Canada; 1969.
  • Heravi F, Salari S, Tanbakuchi B, Loh S, Amiri M. Effects of crown-root angle on stress distribution in the maxillary central incisors’ PDL during application of intrusive and retraction forces: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Progress in Orthodontics 2013; 14:26.
  • Covani U, Ricci M, Tonelli P, Barone A. An Evaluation of New Designs in Implant-Abutment Connections: A Finite Element Method Assessment. Implant Dentistry 2013; 22(3):263-267.
  • Baggi L, Cappelloni I, Di Girolamo M, Maceri F, Vairo G. The influence of implant diameter and length on stress distribution of osseointegrated implants related to crestal bone geometry: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;100(6):422-431.
  • Petrie CS, Williams JL. Comparative evaluation of implant designs: influence of diameter, length, and taper on strains in the alveolar crest. A three-dimensional finite-element analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2005;16:486-494.
  • İplikçioğlu H, Akça K. Comperative evaluation of the effect of diameter, length and number of implants supporting three unit fixed partial protheses on stress distribution in the bone. Journal of Dentistry 2002;30:41-46.
  • Chou I-C , Lee S-Y, Wu M-C , Sun C-W, Jiang C-P. Finite element modelling of implant designs and cortical bone thickness on stress distribution in maxillary type IV bone. Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering. 2014;17(5):516-526.
  • Geng JP, Tan KB, Liu GR. Application of finite element analysis in implant dentistry: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2001;85:585-598.
  • Teixeira ER, Sato Y, Akagawa Y, Shindoi N. A comparative evaluation of mandibular finite element models with different lengths and elements for implant biomechanics. J Oral Rehabil 1998;25(4):299-303.
  • İsmail YH, Pahountis LN, Fleming JF. Comparison of two-dimensional and three-dimensional finite element analysis of a blade implant. International Journal of Oral Maxillofacial Implants 1987;4(2), 25-31.
  • Wakabayashi N, Ona M, Suzuki T, Igarashi Y. Nonlinear finite element analyses: advances and challenges in dental applications. J Dent 2008;36:463-471.
  • Lin CL, Wang JC. Nonlinear finite element analysis of a splinted implant with various connectors and occlusal forces. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:331-340.
  • O’Brien W J. Dental materials and their selection, Quintessence Pub Co Inc 2nd Edition,1997.
  • Meijer HJ, Starmans FJ, Bosman F, Steen WH. A comparison of three finite element models of an edentulous mandible provided with implants. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 1993;20(2):147-157.
  • Koyano K, Esaki D. Occlusion on oral implants: current clinical guidelines. J Oral Rehabil 2014 Oct. 6 doi: 10.1111/joor.12239 (Epub ehead of print).
  • Wiskott HW, Belser UC. Lack of integration of smooth titanium surfaces:a working hypothesis based on strains generated in the surrounding bone. Clin Oral Implants Res 1999;10:429-44.
  • Rangert B, Krogh PH, Langer B, Van Roekel N. Bending overload and implant fracture: a retrospective clinical analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1995;10:326-334.
  • Misch CE. Contemporaray Implant Dentisrty. Mosby Elsevier 2008;Third edition:337
  • Baggi L, Cappelloni I, Di Girolamo M, Maceri F, Vairo G. The influence of implant diameter and length on stress distribution of osseointegrated implants related to crestal bone geometry: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2008;100:422-431.
  • Winkler S, Morris HF, Ochi S. Implant survival to 36 months as related to length and diameter. Ann Periodontol 2000;5:22-31.
  • Yamanishi Y, Yamaguchi S, Imazato S, Nakano T, Yatani H. Influences of implant neck design and implant-abutment joint type on peri-implant bone stress and abutment micromovement: three-dimensional finite element analysis. Dent Mater. 2012 Nov;28(11):1126-1133.
  • Himmlova L, Dostalova T, Kacovsky A, Konvickova S. Influence of implant length and diameter on stress distribution: a finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2004;91:20-25.
  • de Baat C, van Loveren C, van der Maarel-Wierink CD, Witter DJ, Creugers NH. After care for durability and profitability of single-unit and multi-unit fixed dental prostheses. Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 2013;120(7-8):411-420.
  • Ogawa T, Dhaiwall S, Naert I, Mine A, Konstrom M, Sasaki K, Duyck J. Impact of implant number, distribution and prothesis material on loading on implants supporting fixed prothesis. J Oral Rehabil 2010;37:525-531
  • Sahin S, Cehreli Z, Yalcin E. The influence of functional forces on the biomechanics of implant-supported prothesis: A rewiev. J Dent 2002;30(7-8):271-282.
  • Duyck J, Van Oosterwyck H, Vander Sloten J, De Cooman M, Puers R, Naert I. .Magnitude and distribution of occlusal forces on oral implants supporting fixed prostheses: an in vivo study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2000;11(5):465-475.
  • Svensson KG, Trulsson M.Impaired force control during food holding and biting in subjects with tooth- or implant-supported fixed prostheses. J Clin Periodontol. 2011;38(12):1137 1146.
Toplam 36 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Bölüm Original Research Articles
Yazarlar

Sedat Güven

Veysel Eratilla

Köksal Beydemir

Serkan Dündar

Yayımlanma Tarihi 24 Nisan 2015
Gönderilme Tarihi 29 Kasım 2014
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2015Cilt: 18 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

EndNote Güven S, Eratilla V, Beydemir K, Dündar S (01 Nisan 2015) THE EVALUTION OF STRESS DISTRIBUTIONS IN 3 AND 5 UNIT DENTAL AND IMPLANT SUPPORTED FIXED ZIRCONIA RESTORATIONS: FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal 18 2 128–140.

Cumhuriyet Dental Journal (Cumhuriyet Dent J, CDJ) is the official publication of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry. CDJ is an international journal dedicated to the latest advancement of dentistry. The aim of this journal is to provide a platform for scientists and academicians all over the world to promote, share, and discuss various new issues and developments in different areas of dentistry. First issue of the Journal of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry was published in 1998. In 2010, journal's name was changed as Cumhuriyet Dental Journal. Journal’s publication language is English.


CDJ accepts articles in English. Submitting a paper to CDJ is free of charges. In addition, CDJ has not have article processing charges.

Frequency: Four times a year (March, June, September, and December)

IMPORTANT NOTICE

All users of Cumhuriyet Dental Journal should visit to their user's home page through the "https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/user" " or "https://dergipark.org.tr/en/user" links to update their incomplete information shown in blue or yellow warnings and update their e-mail addresses and information to the DergiPark system. Otherwise, the e-mails from the journal will not be seen or fall into the SPAM folder. Please fill in all missing part in the relevant field.

Please visit journal's AUTHOR GUIDELINE to see revised policy and submission rules to be held since 2020.