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
. 2022 Jul 1;10(7):117.
doi: 10.3390/dj10070117.

Does the Length of Mini Dental Implants Affect Their Resistance to Failure by Overloading?

Rafif Alshenaiber  1   2 , Nick Silikas  1 , Craig Barclay  3
Affiliations

Does the Length of Mini Dental Implants Affect Their Resistance to Failure by Overloading?

Rafif Alshenaiber et al. Dent J (Basel). .

Abstract

Objective: We aimed to evaluate the failure resistance of different lengths of mini dental implants from the same manufacturer, and to assess their failure following overloading. Materials and Methods: According to the ISO 14801, 15 mini dental implants 2.4 mm in diameter, with lengths of 8.5 mm, 10 mm, or 13 mm, were subjected to compression loading until failure using a universal testing machine. The mean load-to-failure values for each length of the mini dental implants were calculated and analysed using SPSS®, via one-way ANOVA (p < 0.05). Results: The mean load to failure for mini dental implants was 329 N (SD 6.23), 326 N (SD 5.95), and 325 N (SD 6.99) for the 13 mm, 10 mm, and 8.5 mm implants, respectively. A comparison of means showed no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.70). The tested mini dental implants exhibited bending failure modes below the first thread. Conclusion: Under high compressive loading testing, there was no effect of the length on the failure of the mini dental implants following overloading. Moreover, all tested mini dental implants with different lengths showed the same failure mode and distortion location.

Keywords: compressive force; dental implant; static load.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interest. Professor Barclay gave invited lectures for Southern Implants®.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Straight ILZ MDIs from Southern Implants® with a diameter of 2.4 mm. The length of the MDIs was 13 mm (left), 10 mm (middle), and 8.5 mm (right).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Scheme of implant sample set-up according to ISO 14801.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Stress–strain curves for mini dental implant samples of each length.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Retrieved mini dental implant sample from the resin block following testing, showing the bend under the first thread.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Alshenaiber R., Cowan C., Barclay C., Silikas N. Analysis of residual ridge morphology in a group of edentulous patients seeking NHS dental implant provision—Retrospective observational lateral cephalometric study. Diagnostics. 2021;11:2348. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics11122348. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cawood J., Howell R. A classification of the edentulous jaws. Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 1988;17:232–236. doi: 10.1016/S0901-5027(88)80047-X. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kheur M., Matani J., Latifi M. Prediction of further residual ridge resorption by a simple biochemical and radiographic evaluation: A pilot study. J. Orofac. Sci. 2012;4:32–37.
    1. Khalifa A., Wada M., Ikebe K., Maeda Y. To what extent residual alveolar ridge can be preserved by implant? A systematic review. Int. J. Implant. Dent. 2016;2:1–9. doi: 10.1186/s40729-016-0057-z. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Renouard F., Nisand D. Impact of implant length and diameter on survival rates. Clin. Oral Implant. Res. 2006;17:35–51. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2006.01349.x. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources