Different Surgical Techniques in the All-on-4 Treatment Concept: Evaluation of the Stress Distribution Created in Implant and Peripheral Bone with Finite Element Analysis.
{"title":"Different Surgical Techniques in the All-on-4 Treatment Concept: Evaluation of the Stress Distribution Created in Implant and Peripheral Bone with Finite Element Analysis.","authors":"Sezai Ciftci, Cem Ungor, Bayram Suleymanli","doi":"10.11607/jomi.9962","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To examine the stresses caused by different All-on-4 surgical techniques-conventional, a combination of monocortical and bicortical, bicortical, and nasal floor elevation-on the implant and the surrounding bone using 3D finite element analysis (FEA).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A 3D bone model of the atrophic maxilla was created based on CT imaging of the fully edentulous adult patient. All implants used in the models were 4 mm in diameter, and the length was 13 mm in the anterior and 15 mm in the posterior. Implants were applied to four different atrophic maxillary models with the All-on-4 technique: anterior and posterior monocortical implants in the first model, anterior monocortical and posterior bicortical in the second model, anterior and posterior bicortical in the third model, and anterior and posterior bicortical with nasal floor elevation in the fourth model. Eight linear analyses were performed by applying force from both vertical and 45-degree oblique directions to the four models prepared in our study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>When the cortical and cancellous bone around the anterior implants was examined, it was observed that the oblique and vertical loading conditions and the stresses around the implant were similar in all models. When the posterior implants were examined, model 1 (ie, anterior and posterior monocortical implants) showed the greatest oblique compression, vertical compression, and vertical tension forces. According to the Von Mises stress (VMS) analysis results for anterior and posterior implants, higher values were observed in model 1 compared to models 3 and 4 under oblique and vertical forces. It was observed that bicortical placement of the implants reduced the stresses on the bone and implant-abutment system but had no significant effect on the stress on the bar.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>According to the results of our study, in the All-on-4 technique, bicortical placement of the implants reduced the stresses on the bone and implant when the anatomical limitations allowed. In addition, nasal floor elevation can be applied in the atrophic maxilla in appropriate indications.</p>","PeriodicalId":50298,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants","volume":"0 0","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.9962","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To examine the stresses caused by different All-on-4 surgical techniques-conventional, a combination of monocortical and bicortical, bicortical, and nasal floor elevation-on the implant and the surrounding bone using 3D finite element analysis (FEA).
Materials and methods: A 3D bone model of the atrophic maxilla was created based on CT imaging of the fully edentulous adult patient. All implants used in the models were 4 mm in diameter, and the length was 13 mm in the anterior and 15 mm in the posterior. Implants were applied to four different atrophic maxillary models with the All-on-4 technique: anterior and posterior monocortical implants in the first model, anterior monocortical and posterior bicortical in the second model, anterior and posterior bicortical in the third model, and anterior and posterior bicortical with nasal floor elevation in the fourth model. Eight linear analyses were performed by applying force from both vertical and 45-degree oblique directions to the four models prepared in our study.
Results: When the cortical and cancellous bone around the anterior implants was examined, it was observed that the oblique and vertical loading conditions and the stresses around the implant were similar in all models. When the posterior implants were examined, model 1 (ie, anterior and posterior monocortical implants) showed the greatest oblique compression, vertical compression, and vertical tension forces. According to the Von Mises stress (VMS) analysis results for anterior and posterior implants, higher values were observed in model 1 compared to models 3 and 4 under oblique and vertical forces. It was observed that bicortical placement of the implants reduced the stresses on the bone and implant-abutment system but had no significant effect on the stress on the bar.
Conclusions: According to the results of our study, in the All-on-4 technique, bicortical placement of the implants reduced the stresses on the bone and implant when the anatomical limitations allowed. In addition, nasal floor elevation can be applied in the atrophic maxilla in appropriate indications.
期刊介绍:
Edited by Steven E. Eckert, DDS, MS ISSN (Print): 0882-2786
ISSN (Online): 1942-4434
This highly regarded, often-cited journal integrates clinical and scientific data to improve methods and results of oral and maxillofacial implant therapy. It presents pioneering research, technology, clinical applications, reviews of the literature, seminal studies, emerging technology, position papers, and consensus studies, as well as the many clinical and therapeutic innovations that ensue as a result of these efforts. The editorial board is composed of recognized opinion leaders in their respective areas of expertise and reflects the international reach of the journal. Under their leadership, JOMI maintains its strong scientific integrity while expanding its influence within the field of implant dentistry. JOMI’s popular regular feature "Thematic Abstract Review" presents a review of abstracts of recently published articles on a specific topical area of interest each issue.