Finite element analysis of the effects of mouthguard produced by combination of layers of different materials on teeth and jaw.
10.4047/jkap.2011.49.4.324
- Author:
Woong Seob SO
1
;
Hyun Jong LEE
;
Woo Jin CHOI
;
Sung Jin HONG
;
Kyung Hee RYU
;
Dae Gyun CHOI
Author Information
1. Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Korea. choi@khu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
FEM analysis;
Mouthguard;
Stress distribution;
Soft layer;
Hard layer
- MeSH:
Adult;
Finite Element Analysis;
Humans;
Jaw;
Mandible;
Maxilla;
Skull;
Temporomandibular Joint;
Tooth
- From:The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
2011;49(4):324-332
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the stress distribution of teeth and jaw on load by differentiating property of materials according to each layer of widely used mouthguard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Korean adult having normal cranium and mandible was selected to examine. A customized mouthguard was constructed by use of DRUFOMAT plate and DRUFOMAT-TE/-SQ of Dreve Co. according to Signature Mouthguard system. The cranium was scanned by means of computed tomography with 1mm interval. It was modeled with CANTIBio BIONIX/Body Builder program and simulated and interpreted using Alter HyperMesh program. The mouthguard was classified as follows according to the layers. (1) soft guard (Bioplast)(SG) (2) hard guard (Duran)(HG) (3) medium guard (Drufomat)(MG) (4) soft layer + hard layer (SG + HG) (5) hard layer + soft layer (HG + SG) (6) soft layer + hard layer + soft layer (SG + HG + SG) (7) hard layer + soft layer + hard layer (HG + SG + HG) The impact locations on mandible were gnathion, the center of inferior border, and the anterior edge of gonial angle. And the impact directions were oblique (45degrees). The impact load was 800 N for 0.1 sec. The stress distribution was measured at maxillary teeth, TMJ and maxilla. The statistics were conducted using Repeated ANOVA and in case of difference, Duncan test was used as post analysis. RESULTS: In teeth and maxilla, the mouthguard contacting soft layer of mandibular teeth presented lowest stress measure and, in contrast, in condyle, the mouthguard contacting hard layer of mandibular teeth presented lowest stress measure. CONCLUSION: For all impact directions, soft layer + hard layer + soft layer, the mouthguard with three layers which the hard layer is sandwiched between two soft layers, showed relatively even distribution of stress in impact.
