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
. 2025 Jun 26;17(6):e86821.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.86821. eCollection 2025 Jun.

Finite Element Analysis of Platform Switching Effects on Stress Distribution in Posterior Implants Placed in Different Bone Types Under Axial and Oblique Loading Conditions

Kanika Yadav  1 , Sandeep Kumar  1 , Rajnish Aggarwal  1 , Iqbal Kaur  1 , Ankit Goyal  2 , Rahul Sharma  3 , Satyendra Banjara  1
Affiliations

Finite Element Analysis of Platform Switching Effects on Stress Distribution in Posterior Implants Placed in Different Bone Types Under Axial and Oblique Loading Conditions

Kanika Yadav et al. Cureus. .

Abstract

Introduction: The present study was conducted to compare stress distribution in platform-switched and non-platform-switched implants placed in D2 (mandible) and D3 (maxilla) bones under axial and oblique loading, using finite element analysis (FEA).

Materials and methods: Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-derived three-dimensional models of the posterior maxilla (D3) and mandible (D2) were developed. Implants (11.5 × 4.2 mm) were modeled with two abutment configurations: 4.2 mm (non-platform switching) and 3.2 mm (platform switching). Porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns were placed on all models. A vertical (axial) load of 200 N and an oblique load of 200 N at 30° were applied to the left first molar. ANSYS Workbench (ANSYS, Inc., Canonsburg, Pennsylvania) was used to assess the von Mises stress distribution in the cortical bone, cancellous bone, implant, abutment, and abutment screws.

Results: Platform switching resulted in lower stress values in both D2 and D3 bones under axial and oblique loads, especially at the crestal bone level. The D3 (maxillary) models exhibited higher stress concentrations overall than the D2 (mandibular) models, indicating a greater biomechanical challenge in less dense bone. Platform switching effectively reduced the peak stresses and led to a more uniform stress distribution. However, the implant and abutment components in the platform-switched models experienced higher internal stress.

Conclusion: Platform switching improved stress distribution and reduced crestal bone stress in both D2 and D3 bones, especially under oblique loading.

Keywords: bone; dental implants; finite element analysis; platform switching; posterior implants; preservation; stresses.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Human subjects: Informed consent for treatment and open access publication was obtained or waived by all participants in this study. Institutional Ethics Committee, Surendera Dental College and Research Institute, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan, India issued approval SDCRI/IEC/23/66. The ethical approval requirement was waived by the Institutional Ethical Committee. Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue. Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. von Mises stresses in maxillary non-platform-switched (NPS) and platform-switched (PS) models under 200 N axial loading.
(A) Cortical bone (NPS), (B) cancellous bone (NPS), (C) implant (NPS), (D) abutment (NPS), (E) cortical bone (PS), (F) cancellous bone (PS), (G) implant (PS), and (H) abutment (PS). The figure is derived directly from finite element software based on data from the study.
Figure 2
Figure 2. von Mises stresses in mandibular non-platform-switched (NPS) and platform-switched (PS) models under 200 N axial loading.
(A) Cortical bone (NPS), (B) cancellous bone (NPS), (C) implant (NPS), (D) abutment (NPS), (E) cortical bone (PS), (F) cancellous bone (PS), (G) implant (PS), and (H) abutment (PS). The figure is derived directly from finite element software based on data from the study.
Figure 3
Figure 3. von Mises stresses in maxillary non-platform-switched (NPS) and platform-switched (PS) models under 200 N oblique loading.
(A) Cortical bone (NPS), (B) cancellous bone (NPS), (C) implant (NPS), (D) abutment (NPS), (E) cortical bone (PS), (F) cancellous bone (PS), (G) implant (PS), and (H) abutment (PS). The figure is derived directly from finite element software based on data from the study.
Figure 4
Figure 4. von Mises stresses in mandibular non-platform-switched (NPS) and platform-switched (PS) models under 200 N oblique loading.
(A) Cortical bone (NPS), (B) cancellous bone (NPS), (C) implant (NPS), (D) abutment (NPS), (E) cortical bone (PS), (F) cancellous bone (PS), (G) implant (PS), and (H) abutment (PS). The figure is derived directly from finite element software based on data from the study.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Restoratively driven planning for implants in the posterior maxilla - part 1: alveolar bone healing, bone assessment and clinical classifications. M King E, Schofield J. Br Dent J. 2023;235:585–592. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bone manipulation procedures in dental implants. Mittal Y, Jindal G, Garg S. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4934094/ Indian J Dent. 2016;7:86–94. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Evaluation of anatomical considerations in the posterior maxillae for sinus augmentation. Lee JE, Jin SH, Ko Y, Park JB. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25405192/ World J Clin Cases. 2014;2:683–688. - PMC - PubMed
    1. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, Brånemark PI. Int J Oral Surg. 1981;10:387–416. - PubMed
    1. Effect of platform switching on crestal bone levels around implants in the posterior mandible: 3 years results from a multicentre randomized clinical trial. Rocha S, Wagner W, Wiltfang J, et al. J Clin Periodontol. 2016;43:374–382. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources