Finite element stress analysis according to apical-coronal implant position.
- Author:
Tae Ho KANG
1
;
Su Gwan KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oral Biology Research Institute, College of Dentistry, Chosun University, Korea. SGCKIM@mail.chosun.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Finite element stress analysis;
Apical-coronal implant position
- MeSH:
Denture, Partial, Fixed;
Iron
- From:Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
2006;32(1):52-59
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of apical-coronal implant position on the stress distribution after occlusal and oblique loading. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The cortical and cancellous bone was assumed to be isotropic, homogeneous, and linearly elastic. The implant was apposed to cortical bone in the crestal region and to cancellous bone for the remainder of the implant-bone interface. The cancellous core was surrounded by 2-mm-thick cortical bone. An axial load of 200 N was assumed and a 200-N oblique load was applied at a buccal inclination of 30 degrees to the center of the pontic and buccal cusps. The 3-D geometry modeled in Iron CAD was interfaced with ANSYS. RESULTS: When only the stress in the bone was compared, the minimal principal stress at load Points A and B, with a axial load applied at 90 degrees or an oblique load applied at 30 degrees, for model 5. The von Mises stress in the screw of model 5 was minimal at Points A and B, for 90- and 30-degree loads. When the von Mises stress of the abutment screw was compared at Points A and B, and a 30-degree oblique load, the maximum principal stress was seen with model 2, while the minimum principal stress was with model 5. In the case of implant, the model that received maximum von Mises stress was model 1 with the load Point A and Point B, axial load applied in 90-degree, and oblique load applied in 30-degree. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: These results suggests that implantation should be done at the supracrestal level only when necessary, since it results in higher stress than when implantation is done at or below the alveolar bone level. Within the limited this study, we recommend the use of supracrestal apical-coronal positioning in the case of clinical indications.
