The biomechanical behavior of single crown implant-supported prosthesis with different types of connections and occlusal loads: Photoelastic and strain gauge analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v10i9.18035Keywords:
Dental Implants; Prostheses and Implants; Dental implant-abutment design.Abstract
The aim of the study was to evaluate the biomechanical behavior, through photoelastic (PA) and strain gauge analysis (SA), of single crown implant-supported prosthesis with different implant connections (external hexagon (EH), Morse taper (MT), internal Morse hexagon (IMH), Morse taper hexagon (MTH), and frictional Morse taper (FMT)) and different occlusal loads (axial and oblique (45°)). The data were submitted to ANOVA and Tukey's test (α = 0,05). By photoelasticity, regarding axial load, EH produced more high-intensity fringes (2.784 kPa) than the other connections. For the oblique load, all connections generated the same high-intensity fringes (3.480 kPa), except by MT group, that produced the same amount as axial load (2.088 kPa). For the strain gauge analysis, for the axial load, EH showed the highest microstrains value (158,76) and lowets for MT (59,88). For all other groups, oblique load produced higher microstrains values than axial load. For the oblique load, MT showed the lowest microstrains value (88.79), followed by FMT (391,43), EH (468,47) and IMH (507,65). MTH presented the highest value (621,25) compared to all groups (P <0.05). When comparing both loads of the same connection system, only MT showed similar values (P <0.05). It was possible to conclude that the different connection systems tested directly influenced the stress distribution at both loads. The implants with internal connection present less stress distribution when submitted to axial load than the EH group. However, when the oblique load was applied, all connections presented higher values of stress distribution, except for the MT group.
References
Andrade, C. L., Carvalho, M. A., Cury, A. A. D. B., & Sotto-Maior, B. S. (2016). Biomechanical Effect of Prosthetic Connection and Implant Body Shape in Low-Quality Bone of Maxillary Posterior Single Implant-Supported Restorations. The International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants, 31(4), 92-7.
Assuncao, W. G., Barao, V. A. R., Tabata, L. F., Gomes, E. A., Delben, J. A., & dos Santos, P. H. (2009). Biomechanics studies in dentistry: bioengineering applied in oral implantology. J Craniofac Surg, 20, 1173-7.
Astrand, P., Engquist, B., Dahlgren, S., Grondahl, K., Engquist, E., & Feldmann, H. (2004) Astra Tech and Branemark system implants: a 5-year prospective study of marginal bone reactions. Clin Oral Implants Res, 15, 413-20.
Atieh, M. A., Ibrahim, H. M., & Atieh, A. H. (2010). Platform switching for marginal bone preservation around dental implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontol, 81, 1350-66.
Aunmeungtong, W., khongkhunthian, P., & Rungsiyakull, P. (2016). Stress and strain distribution in three different mini dental implant designs using in implant retained overdenture: a finite element analysis study. ORAL & implantology, 9(4), 202-212.
Binon, P. P. (2000). Implants and components: entering the new millennium. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, (15), 76-94.
Branemark, P. I., Zarb, G., Albrektsson T. & Rosen, H. (1986). Tissue-Integrated Prostheses. Osseointegration in Clinical Dentistry. Quintessence Publishing Co. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 77(3), 496-497.
Campaner, M., Borges, A. C. M., Camargo, D. A., Mazza, L. C., Bitencourt, S. B., Medeiros, R. A., Goiato, M. C., & Pesqueira, A. A. (2019). Journal of Clinical & Diagnostic Research, 13(5), 04-09.
Cehreli, M. C., Akca, K., Iplikcioglu, H., & Sahin, S. (2004). Dynamic fatigue resistance of implant-abutment junction in an internally notched morse-taper oral implant: influence of abutment design. Clin Oral Implants Res, 15, 459-65.
Cooper, L. F., Tarnow, D., Froum, S., Moriarty, J., & De Kok, I. J. (2016). Comparison of Marginal Bone Changes with Internal Conus and External Hexagon Design Implant Systems: A Prospective, Randomized Study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 36, 631-42.
Finger, I. M., Castellon, P., Block, M., & Elian, N. (2003). The evolution of external and internal implant/abutment connections. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent, 15, 625-32.
Goellner, M., Schmitt, J., Karl, M., Wichmann, M., & Holst, S. (2011). The effect of axial and oblique loading on the micromovement of dental implants. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 26(2), 257-64.
Goellner, M., Schmitt, J., Karl, M., Wichmann, M., & Holst, S. (2011). The effect of axial and oblique loading on the micromovement of dental implants. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 26(2), 257-64.
Goiato, M. C., Pesqueira, A. A., Falcon-Antenucci, R. M., Dos Santos, D. M., Haddad, M. F., Bannwart, L. C., & Moreno A. (2013). Stress distribution in implant-supported prosthesis with external and internal implant-abutment connections. Acta Odontol Scand, 71, 283-8.
Goiato, M. C., Tonella, B. P., Ribeiro, P. P., Ferrac, R., & Peliizzer, E. P. (2009). Methods used for assessing stresses in bucomaxillary prostheses: photoelasticity, finite elemento technique and extensometry. J Craniofac Surg, 20, 561-4.
Gracis, S., Michalakis, K., Vigolo, P., Vult von Steyern, P., Zwahlen, M., & Sailer, I. (2012). Internal vs. external connections for abutments/reconstructions: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res, 23, 202-16.
Koke U, Wolf A, Lenz P, & Gilde H. (2004). In vitro investigation of marginal accuracy of implant-supported screw-retained partial dentures. J Oral Rehabil, 31, 477-82.
Lemos, C. A. A., Verri, F. R., Bonfante, E. A., Santiago Junior, J. F., & Pellizzer, E. P. (2017). Comparison of external and internal implant-abutment connections for implant supported prostheses. A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent, 70, 14-22.
Maeda, Y., Satoh, T., & Sogo, M. (2006). In vitro differences of stress concentrations for internal and external hex implant-abutment connections: a short communication. J Oral Rehabil, 33, 75-8.
Nentwig, G. H. (2004). Ankylos implant system: concept and clinical application. J Oral Implantol, 30, 171-7.
Nishioka, R. S., de Vasconcellos, L. G. O., & Nishioka, G. N. M. (2011). Comparative strain gauge analysis of external and internal hexagon, Morse taper, and influence of straight and offset implant configuration. Implant Dent, 20, 24-32.
Ozcelik, T., & Ersoy, A. E. (2007). An investigation of tooth/implant-supported fixed prosthesis designs with two different stress analysis methods: an in vitro study. J Prosthodont, 16, 107-16.
Palmer R. M., Palmer P. J., & Smith, B. J. (1997). A prospective study of Astra single tooth implants. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 8(3), 173-179.
Pesqueira, A. A., Goiato, M. C., Gennarri-Filho, H., Monteiro, D. R., dos Santos, D. M., Haddad, M. F., & Pellizzer, E. P. (2014). Use of stress analysis methods to evaluate the biomechanics of oral rehabilitation with implants. Journal of Oral Implantology, 40(2), 217-228.
Pessoa, R. S., Muraru, L., Júnior, E. M., Vaz, L. G., Sloten, J. V. , Duyck, J., & Jaecques S. V. N. (2010). Influence of implant connection type on the biomechanical environment of immediately placed implants–CT‐based nonlinear, three‐dimensional finite element analysis, 12(3), 219-34.
Pessoa, R. S., Sousa, R. M., Pereira, L. M., Neves, F. D., Bezerra, F. J. B., Jaecques, S. V. N., loten, J. V., Quirynen, M., Teughels, W., & Spin-Neto R. (2017). Bone remodeling around implants with external hexagon and morse‐taper connections: a randomized, controlled, split‐mouth, clinical trial. Clinical implant dentistry and related research, 19(1), 97-110.
Schmitt, C. M., Nogueira-Filho, G., Tenenbaum, H. C., Lai, J. Y., Brito, C., Doring, H., & Nonhoff, J. (2014). Performance of conical abutment (Morse Taper) connection implants: a systematic review. J Biomed Mater Res, 102, 552-74.
Yamaguchi, S., Yamanishi, Y., Machado, L. S., Matsumoto, S., Tovar, N., Coelho, P. G., Thompson, V. P., & Imazato, S. (2017). In vitro fatigue tests and in silico finite element analysis of dental implants with different fixture/abutment joint types using computer-aided design models. J Prosthodont Res, 62(1), 24-30.
Zaparolli, D., Peixoto, R. F., Pupim, D., Macedo, A. P., Toniollo, M. B., & Mattos, M. G. C. (2017). Photoelastic analysis of mandibular full-arch implant-supported fixed dentures made with different bar materials and manufacturing techniques. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl, 81, 144-7.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Caroline de Freitas Jorge; Letícia Cerri Mazza; Marcio Campaner; Abbas Zahoui; Lorena Scaioni Silva; Kevin Henrique Cruz; Aldiéris Alves Pesqueira
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.
