Different bone anchorages for Morse taper implants with different lengths in maxilla anterior: An in silico analysis
Keywords:Dental implants; Finite element analysis; Bone tissue
This study aimed to evaluate the stress distribution in bone tissue, in Morse tapper implants and components supporting a single crown in the maxillary anterior area, under different bone anchorages (conventional, bicortical and bicortical with nasal floor elevation) and implant lengths (8.5 mm, 10 mm and 11.5 mm) using 3D finite element analyses. Three 3D models including element #11 were simulated using software InVesalius, Rhinoceros 3D and SolidWorks. Bone block models were reconstructed from computed tomography and simulated the placement of one implant of 4 mm of diameter and lengths above mentioned, supporting cemented zirconia crown. The 3D models were processed by the finite element FEMAP and NeiNastran software, using a load of 178N were applied at 0º, 30º and 60º, considering the implant long axis. Results were visualized as the von Mises stress, maximum principal stress and microstrain maps. Bicortical bone anchorages showed lower stress and microstrain bone tissue when compared to conventional bone anchorage. However, no differences were observed between bicortical and nasal floor elevation. Regarding implants and components, the stress distribution was similar between models with little stress relief in the apical region of the implants for implants with conventional anchorage. The conclusion drawn from this study is that non-axial loading showed worse biomechanical behavior for bone tissue and implants/components. The bicortical techniques (bicortical and nasal floor elevation) should be preferred during the implant placement to reduce the stress and microstrain in the bone tissue.
Ahn, S. J., Leesungbok, R., Lee, S. W., Heo, Y. K., & Kang, K. L. (2012). Differences in implant stability associated with various methods of preparation of the implant bed: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 107(6): 366-72.
Castro, D. S., et al. (2014). Comparative histological and histomorphometrical evaluation of marginal bone resorption around external hexagon and Morse cone implants: an experimental study in dogs. Implant Dent. 23(3):270-6.
Cruz, R. S., et al. (2018). Short implants versus longer implants with maxillary sinus lift. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Braz Oral Res.32:e86.
Cruz, R. S., et al. (2020). Clinical comparison between crestal and subcrestal dental implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent. S0022-3913(20)30691-0.
de Souza Batista, V. E., et al. (2017) Finite element analysis of implant-supported prosthesis with pontic and cantilever in the posterior maxilla. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 20(6): 663-670. (2)
de Souza Batista, V. E, et al. (2017). Evaluation of the effect of an offset implant configuration in the posterior maxilla with external hexagon implant platform: A 3-dimensional finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 118(3): 363-371.
Faria PE, et al. (2016). Immediate loading of implants in the edentulous mandible: a multicentre study. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 20(4): 385-390.
Felisati G, et al. (2013). Sinonasal complications resulting from dental treatment: outcome-oriented proposal of classification and surgical protocol. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 27(4): e101-6.
Frost, H. M. (2003). Bone's mechanostat: a 2003 update. Anat. Rec. A Discov. Mol. Cell. Evol. Biol. 275: 1081-1101.
Goiato M. C, et al. (2014). Longevity of dental implants in type IV bone: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 43(9):1108-16.
Gonçalves, T. M, et al. (2015). Long-term Short Implants Performance: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Essential Assessment Parameters. Braz Dent J. 26(4): 325-36.
Guida, L, et al. (2020). 6-mm-short and 11-mm-long implants compared in the full-arch rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible: A 3-year multicenter randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 31(1):64-73
Han, H. C, et al. (2016). Primary implant stability in a bone model simulating clinical situations for the posterior maxilla: an in vitro study. J Periodontal Implant Sci. 46(4):254-65.
Huang, H.-L., et al. (2009). Biomechanical effects of a maxillary implant in the augmented sinus: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. The International Journal of Oral&Maxillofacial Implants. 24(3): 455–62.
Ivanoff, C. J., et al. (2000). Influence of bicortical or monocortical anchorage on maxillary implant stability: a 15-year retrospective study of Brånemark System implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 15(1): 103–110.
Kan, B, et al. (2015). Effects of inter-implant distance and implant length on the response to frontal traumatic force of two anterior implants in an atrophic mandible: three-dimensional finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 44(7): 908-13.
Kfir, E, et al. (2012). Minimally invasive subnasal elevation and antral membrane balloon elevation along with bone augmentation and implants placement. J Oral Implantol. 38(4): 365-76.
Lazari, P. C., et al. (2014). Influence of the veneer-framework interface on the mechanical behavior of ceramic veneers: a nonlinear finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 112(4):857-63.
Lekholm, U., & Zarb, G. A. (1985). Patient selection and preparation. In: Brånemark, P.I., Zarb, G.A., Albrektsson, T. (Eds.), Tissue-integrated Prostheses. Osseointegration in Clinical Dentistry, Quintessence, Chicago, pp. 199–209.
Lemos, C. A., et al. (2016). Short dental implants versus standard dental implants placed in the posterior jaws: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 47:8-17.
Lemos, C. A. A., et al. (2018). Retention System and Splinting on Morse Taper Implants in the Posterior Maxilla by 3D Finite Element Analysis. Braz Dent J. 29(1):30-35.
Limbert, G., et al. (2010). Trabecular bone strains around a dental implant and associated micromotions--a micro-CT-based three-dimensional finite element study. J Biomech. 43(7):1251-61.
Mangano, F., et al. (2012). Single-tooth Morse taper connection implants placed in fresh extraction sockets of the anterior maxilla: an aesthetic evaluation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 23(11): 1302-7.
Mazor, Z., et al. (2012). Nasal floor elevation combined with dental implant placement. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 14(5): 768-71.
Minatel, L., et al. (2017). Effect of different types of prosthetic platforms on stress-distribution in dental implant-supported prostheses. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 71:35-42.
Pellizzer, E. P., et al. (2018). Biomechanical analysis of different implant-abutments interfaces in different bone types: An in silico analysis. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 90: 645-650.
Santiago Junior, J F., et al. (2016). Finite element analysis on influence of implant surface treatments, connection and bone types. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl. 63: 292-300.
Sertgöz, A. (1997) Finite element analysis study of the effect of superstructure material on stress distribution in an implant-supported fixed prosthesis. Int J Prosthodont. 10(1):19-27.
Sevimay, M., et al. (2005). Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the effect of different bone quality on stress distribution in an implant-supported crown. J Prosthet Dent. Mar;93(3):227-34.
Sotto-Maior, B. S., et al. (2014). Biomechanical evaluation of subcrestal dental implants with different bone anchorages. Braz Oral Res.
Strub, J. R., et al. (2012). Prognosis of immediately loaded implants and their restorations: a systematic literature review. J Oral Rehabil. 39(9):704-17.
Telleman, G., et al. (2011). A systematic review of the prognosis of short (<10 mm) dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient. J Clin Periodontol. 38(7): 667-76.
Toniollo, M. B., et al. (2017). A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of the Stress Distribution Generated by Splinted and Nonsplinted Prostheses in the Rehabilitation of Various Bony Ridges with Regular or Short Morse Taper Implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 32(2): 372-376.
Verri, F. R., et al. (2016). Can the modeling for simplification of a dental implant surface affect the accuracy of 3D finite element analysis? Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 19(15): 1665-72.
Verri, F. R., et al. (2017). Influence of bicortical techniques in internal connection placed in premaxillary area by 3D finite element analysis. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 20(2):193-200. (2)
Verri, F. R., et al. (2017). Biomechanical Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Single Implant-Supported Prostheses in the Anterior Maxilla, with Different Surgical Techniques and Implant Types. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 32(4): e191-e198.
Verri, F. R., et al. Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Anterior Single Implant-Supported Prostheses with Different Bone Anchorages. ScientificWorldJournal. 2015; 2015:321528.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2021 Hiskell Fernandes Fernandes e Oliveira; Cleidiel Araujo Lemos; Ronaldo Silva Cruz; Victor Eduardo de Souza Batista; Rodrigo Capalbo da Silva; Fellippo Ramos Verri
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.