Influence of bone and dental implant parameters on stress distribution in the mandible: a finite element study
- PMID: 19865627
Influence of bone and dental implant parameters on stress distribution in the mandible: a finite element study
Abstract
Purpose: The complicated relationships between mandibular bone components and dental implants have attracted the attention of structural mechanics researchers as well as dental practitioners. Using the finite element method, the present study evaluated various bone and implant parameters for their influence on the distribution of von Mises stresses within the mandible.
Materials and methods: Various parameters were considered, including Young's modulus of cancellous bone, which varies from 1 to 4 GPa, and that of cortical bone, which is between 7 and 20 GPa. Implant length (7, 9, 11, 13, and 15 mm), implant diameter (3.5, 4.0, 4.5, and 5.5 mm), and cortical bone thickness (0.3 to 2.1 mm) were also considered as parameters. Assumptions made in the analysis were: modeling of the complex material and geometric properties of the bone and implant using two-dimensional triangular and quadrilateral plane strain elements, 50% osseointegration between bone and implant, and linear relationships between the stress value and Young's modulus of both cancellous and cortical bone at any specific point.
Results: An increase in Young's modulus and a decrease in the cortical bone thickness resulted in elevated stresses within both cancellous and cortical bone. Increases in the implant length led to greater surface contact between the bone and implant, thereby reducing the magnitude of stress.
Conclusions: The applied masticatory force was demonstrated to be the most influential, in terms of differences between minimum and maximum stress values, versus all other parameters. Therefore loading should be considered of vital importance when planning implant placement.
Similar articles
-
Evaluation of multiple implant-bone parameters on stress characteristics in the mandible under traumatic loading conditions.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010 May-Jun;25(3):461-72. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2010. PMID: 20556244
-
Effect of diameter and length on stress distribution of the alveolar crest around immediate loading implants.Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2009 Dec;11(4):279-87. doi: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2008.00124.x. Epub 2008 Sep 9. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2009. PMID: 18783411
-
Influence of implant design and bone quality on stress/strain distribution in bone around implants: a 3-dimensional finite element analysis.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003 May-Jun;18(3):357-68. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003. PMID: 12814310
-
Finite element stress analysis of cuneiform and cylindrical threaded implant geometries.Technol Health Care. 2006;14(4-5):421-38. Technol Health Care. 2006. PMID: 17065763 Review.
-
Effect of different impactor designs on biomechanical behavior in the interface bone-implant: A comparative biomechanics study.Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2020 Dec;197:105723. doi: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2020.105723. Epub 2020 Aug 25. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2020. PMID: 32877819 Review.
Cited by
-
Influence of Implant Dimensions in the Resorbed and Bone Augmented Mandible: A Finite Element Study.Contemp Clin Dent. 2020 Oct-Dec;11(4):336-341. doi: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_366_19. Epub 2020 Dec 20. Contemp Clin Dent. 2020. PMID: 33850399 Free PMC article.
-
Influence of bone parameters on peri-implant bone strain distribution in the posterior mandible.Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2015 Jan 1;20(1):e66-73. doi: 10.4317/medoral.19878. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2015. PMID: 25129251 Free PMC article.
-
Influence of Implant Design (Cylindrical and Conical) in the Load Transfer Surrounding Long (13mm) and Short (7mm) Length Implants: A Photoelastic Analysis.Open Dent J. 2016 Sep 30;10:522-530. doi: 10.2174/1874210601610010522. eCollection 2016. Open Dent J. 2016. PMID: 27843505 Free PMC article.
-
Injury of the Inferior Alveolar Nerve during Implant Placement: a Literature Review.J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2011 Apr 1;2(1):e1. doi: 10.5037/jomr.2011.2101. eCollection 2011. J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2011. PMID: 24421983 Free PMC article.
-
Dental implant surfaces after insertion in bone: an in vitro study in four commercial implant systems.Clin Oral Investig. 2018 Apr;22(3):1593-1600. doi: 10.1007/s00784-017-2262-4. Epub 2017 Oct 24. Clin Oral Investig. 2018. PMID: 29067521