Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015:2015:943839.
doi: 10.1155/2015/943839. Epub 2015 Dec 21.

FEM Analysis of Mandibular Prosthetic Overdenture Supported by Dental Implants: Evaluation of Different Retention Methods

M Cicciù  1 , G Cervino  2 , E Bramanti  2 , F Lauritano  2 , G Lo Gudice  2 , L Scappaticci  3 , A Rapparini  3 , E Guglielmino  4 , G Risitano  4
Affiliations

FEM Analysis of Mandibular Prosthetic Overdenture Supported by Dental Implants: Evaluation of Different Retention Methods

M Cicciù et al. Comput Math Methods Med. 2015.

Abstract

Prosthetic rehabilitation of total edentulous jaws patients is today a common technique that clinicians approach in their daily practice. The use of dental implants for replacing missing teeth is going to be a safe technique and the implant-prosthetic materials give the possibility of having long-term clinical success. Aim of this work is to evaluate the mechanical features of three different prosthetic retention systems. By applying engineering systems of investigations like FEM and von Mises analyses, how the dental implant material holds out against the masticatory strength during the chewing cycles has been investigated. Three common dental implant overdenture retention systems have been investigated. The ball attachment system, the locator system, and the common dental abutment have been processed by Ansys Workbench 15.0 and underwent FEM and von Mises investigations. The elastic features of the materials used in the study have been taken from recent literature data. Results revealed different response for both types of device, although locator system showed better results for all conditions of loading. The data of this virtual model show all the features of different prosthetic retention systems under the masticatory load. Clinicians should find the better prosthetic solution related to the patients clinical condition in order to obtain long-term results.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Example of the three models of the prosthetic retention systems. Study A, ball attachment; study B, locator; study C, universal abutment.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Example of standard mesh automatically generated mesh and final. The greater accuracy of the elements in the second case can be noted.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Different load type used in the studies.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Areas of maximum tension for the two components (internal and external) of the matrix of retention Dalbo CM-Plus bending pure stress.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Areas of maximum voltage for the pillar and the implant bending pure stress.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Areas of greatest tension for the cortical and cancellous bone under bending pure stress.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Areas of maximum voltage for the retention insert and the pillar locator bending pure stress.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Areas of maximum stress for the implant and the cancellous bone under bending pure stress.
Figure 9
Figure 9
Areas of maximum voltage for the cortical bone to pure bending and tensile at 45°.
Figure 10
Figure 10
Areas of maximum voltage for the abutment and the fixture.
Figure 11
Figure 11
Areas of maximum voltage for the cortical bone and midollar bone at pure flection.
Figure 12
Figure 12
Areas of maximum voltage for the passing screw for flection and traction.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Cicciù M., Beretta M., Risitano G., Maiorana C. Cemented-retained vs screw-retained implant restorations: an investigation on 1939 dental implants. Minerva Stomatologica. 2008;57(4):167–179. - PubMed
    1. Michailidis N., Karabinas G., Tsouknidas A., Maliaris G., Tsipas D., Koidis P. A FEM based endosteal implant simulation to determine the effect of peri-implant bone resorption on stress induced implant failure. Bio-Medical Materials and Engineering. 2013;23(5):317–327. doi: 10.3233/BME-130756. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hoshaw S. J., Brunski J. B., Cochran G. V. B. Mechanical loading of Branemark implants affects interfacial bone modeling and remodeling. The International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. 1994;9(3):345–360.
    1. Holmgren E. P., Seckinger R. J., Kilgren L. M., Mante F. Evaluating parameters of osseointegrated dental implants using finite element analysis—a two-dimensional comparative study examining the effects of implant diameter, implant shape, and load direction. The Journal of Oral Implantology. 1998;24(2):80–88. doi: 10.1563/1548-1336(1998)02460;0080:epoodi62;2.3.co;2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. 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. doi: 10.1097/id.0b013e318292625f. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Substances

LinkOut - more resources