The study of the stress distribution in bone around 8 mm-length dental implant by threedimensional finite element analysis

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-1366.2012.01.001

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To analyze the stress distribution on implant-bone interface， with varying diameter of 8-mm implant in different bone density （40% osseointegration） for the clinical application of short dental implant.

Methods

Three-dimensional finite element was used to simulate the stress of 8-mm implants with six different diameters in Ⅰ-Ⅳbone density， and a vertical loading and a 45 degree slope loading was applied in this study.

Results

Regardless of vertical loading or 45 degree slope loading， maximum Von-Mises stress decreased as the increase of diameter of dental implants in all four type of bone density. The maximum stress varied significantly when the diameter was bounded in 3.3 mm to 5 mm （slope was around-1）， while when the diameter was within 5.5 mm to 7.1 mm， the variation was much more slight （slope was near 0）. The maximum stress on implant-bone interface increased as the decrease of bone density， in summary， Ⅳ＞Ⅲ＞Ⅱ＞Ⅰ. The maximum stress in Type Ⅰand Type Ⅱhad similar distribution and so as that of in Type Ⅲand Ⅳ.

Conclusions

The larger diameter implant （the diameter in 3.3 mm to 5 mm） would be recommended in order to get better clinical effects.However， when the diameter was above 5.5 mm， much better stress distribution would not be achieved by increasing implant diameter. The result also indicated that the stress was far greater in type Ⅲand type Ⅳbone quality than that of in type Ⅰand type Ⅱbone quality. To achieve better clinical outcome， bone condensing or bone transplantation before inserting the implant， by which bone density can be ascended， would be recommended.

Key words: Short dental implant, Implant diameter, Three-dimensional finite element, Stress analysis

Ning KANG, Ping GONG, Juan-juan LI, Guo-min OU. The study of the stress distribution in bone around 8 mm-length dental implant by threedimensional finite element analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Stomatological Research(Electronic Edition), 2012, 6(01): 1-8.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhkqyxyjzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-1366.2012.01.001

https://zhkqyxyjzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2012/V6/I01/1

Figures/Tables 8

References 18

1	Misch CE. Short dental implants： a literature review and rationale for use. Dent Today， 2005，24（8）：64-66，68
2	Olate S， Lyrio MC， de Moraes M， et al. Influence of diameter and length of implant on early dental implant failure. J Oral Maxillofac Surg，2010，68（2）：414-419
3	Sun HL， Huang C， Wu YR， et al. Failure rates of short（≤10 mm） dental implants and factors influencing their failure： a systematic review.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants， 2011，26（4）：816-825.
4	Fugazzotto PA. Shorter implants in clinical practice： rationale and treatment results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants， 2008，23（3）：487-96.
5	Draenert FG， Sagheb K， Baumgardt K. Retrospective analysis of survival rates and marginal bone loss on short implants in the mandible.Clin Oral Implants Res， 2011 Sep 27. doi：10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02266.x.
6	吴茴，李健慧，邸萍，等. 口腔短种植体长期修复效果的评估. 中华口腔医学杂志， 2010，45（12）：712-716.
7	O'Mahony AM， Williams JL， Speneer P. Anisotropie elastieity of cortical and cancellous bone in the posterior mandible increases periimplant stress and stain under obliqueloading. Clinieal Oral Implants Researeh， 2001，12（6）：648-657.
8	Danza M， Quaranta A， Carinci F. Biomechanical evaluation of dental implants in D1 and D4 bone by Finite Element Analysis.Minerva Stomatol， 2010，59（6）：305-313.
9	Holmes DC， Diaz-Arnold AM， Leary JM. Influence of post dimension on stress distribution in dentin. J Prosthet Dent， 1996，75（2）：140-147.
10	Kitamura E， Stegaroiu R， Nomura S， et al. Influence of marginal bone resorption on stress around an implant—a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Oral Rehabil， 2005，32（4）：279-286.
11	Chen J， Esterle M， Roberts WE. Mechanical response to functional loading around the threads of retromolar endosseous implants utilized for orthodontic anchorage： coordinated histomorphometric and finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants， 1999，14（2）：282-289.
12	Sahin S， Akagawa Y， Wadamoto M. The three-dimensional bone interface of an osseointegrated implant. Ⅱ： A morphometric evaluation after three months of loading. J Prosthet Dent， 1996，76（2）：176-180.
13	Barbier L， Schepers E. Adaptive bone remodeling around oral implants under axial and nonaxial loading conditions in the dog mandible. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants， 1997，12（2）：215-223.
14	Block MS， Finger IM， Fontenot MG， et al. Loaded hydroxylapatite-coated and grit-blasted titanium implants in dogs. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants， 1989，4（3）：219-225.
15	Rho JY， Ashman RB， Turner CH. Young's modulus of trabecular and cortical bone material： ultrasonic and microtensile measurements. J Biomech， 1993，26（2）：111-119.
16	Ohashi T， Matsunaga S， Nakahara K， et al. Biomechanical role of peri-implant trabecular structures during vertical loading. Clin Oral Investig， 2010，14（5）：507-513.
17	Akça K， Iplikçiogˇlu H. Finite element stress analysis of the influence of staggered versus straight placement of dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants， 2001，16（5）：722-730.
18	Kong L， Sun Y， Hu K， et al. Bivariate evaluation of cylinder implant diameter and length： a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Prosthodont， 2008，17（4）：286-293.

项目	#1	#2	#3	#4	#5	#6
植体直径	3.3 mm	4.1 mm	4.8 mm	5.5 mm	6.5 mm	7.1 mm
节点数	2255	2172	2186	2193	2184	2186
单元数	1697	1636	1646	1651	1644	1646

项目	#1	#2	#3	#4	#5	#6
植体直径	3.3 mm	4.1 mm	4.8 mm	5.5 mm	6.5 mm	7.1 mm
节点数	2255	2172	2186	2193	2184	2186
单元数	1697	1636	1646	1651	1644	1646

项目	#1	#2	#3	#4	#5	#6
植体直径	3.3 mm	4.1 mm	4.8 mm	5.5 mm	6.5 mm	7.1 mm
节点数	99 905	99 905	99 497	99 497	99 089	99 089
单元数	73 432	73 432	73 041	73 041	72 650	72 650

项目	#1	#2	#3	#4	#5	#6
植体直径	3.3 mm	4.1 mm	4.8 mm	5.5 mm	6.5 mm	7.1 mm
节点数	99 905	99 905	99 497	99 497	99 089	99 089
单元数	73 432	73 432	73 041	73 041	72 650	72 650

材料	弹性模量（MPa）	泊松比
密质骨^［9］	13 700	0.30
松质骨Ⅰ^［15］	9 500	0.30
松质骨Ⅱ^［15］	5 500	0.30
松质骨Ⅲ^［15］	1 600	0.30
松质骨Ⅳ^［15］	690	0.30
纯钛^［10］	110 000	0.35

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export