Comparative study of 3D contact area percentage between zygomatic implant and bone in different surgical approaches: clinical and biomechanical perspectives.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 Dentistry Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Pub Date : 2024-11-14 DOI:10.1016/j.jormas.2024.102148
Ting Xin Hong, Aaron Yu Jen Wu, Yuan Chien Chen, Jui Ting Hsu, Lih Jyh Fuh, Heng Li Huang
{"title":"Comparative study of 3D contact area percentage between zygomatic implant and bone in different surgical approaches: clinical and biomechanical perspectives.","authors":"Ting Xin Hong, Aaron Yu Jen Wu, Yuan Chien Chen, Jui Ting Hsu, Lih Jyh Fuh, Heng Li Huang","doi":"10.1016/j.jormas.2024.102148","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Zygomatic implants, either alone or in combination with dental implant placement, have emerged as a viable surgical option for elderly patients with severe bone atrophy for occlusal restoration. This study aims to examine the biomechanical impact of the three-dimensional contact area between zygomatic implants and bone on biomechanics under different surgical methods.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) images from 10 patients with severe bone atrophy, we reconstructed 3D maxillary bone models and created corresponding 3D zygomatic implant models. Two distinct surgical methods (extramaxillary or intrasinus approaches) were employed based on the position and angle of the zygomatic implant for each patient. The 3D bone-to-implant contact percentage (BIC%) was calculated, and finite element analysis with nonlinear contact was conducted to assess the relationship between 3D BIC% and surrounding bone stress for both surgical methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 3D BIC% of extramaxillary approach (57.63 %) and intrasinus approach (56.49 %) for total bone (including cortical and cancellous bone) was similar (P = 0.425) in zygomatic implant surgery. In contrast, the intrasinus method exhibited higher 3D BIC% in cortical bone contact (28.08 %) compared to the extramaxillary approach (21.92 %) (P = 0.011). The correlation between 3D BIC% and high bone stress was stronger in the intrasinus approach, likely due to increased contact area in cortical bone.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The intrasinus approach led to lower bone stress and a more robust correlation between bone stress and 3D BIC%, particularly in cortical bone contact. Importantly, the coverage area of cortical bone surrounding the zygomatic implant significantly influenced biomechanical performance of the zygomatic implants.</p>","PeriodicalId":56038,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"102148"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jormas.2024.102148","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Zygomatic implants, either alone or in combination with dental implant placement, have emerged as a viable surgical option for elderly patients with severe bone atrophy for occlusal restoration. This study aims to examine the biomechanical impact of the three-dimensional contact area between zygomatic implants and bone on biomechanics under different surgical methods.

Material and methods: Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) images from 10 patients with severe bone atrophy, we reconstructed 3D maxillary bone models and created corresponding 3D zygomatic implant models. Two distinct surgical methods (extramaxillary or intrasinus approaches) were employed based on the position and angle of the zygomatic implant for each patient. The 3D bone-to-implant contact percentage (BIC%) was calculated, and finite element analysis with nonlinear contact was conducted to assess the relationship between 3D BIC% and surrounding bone stress for both surgical methods.

Results: The 3D BIC% of extramaxillary approach (57.63 %) and intrasinus approach (56.49 %) for total bone (including cortical and cancellous bone) was similar (P = 0.425) in zygomatic implant surgery. In contrast, the intrasinus method exhibited higher 3D BIC% in cortical bone contact (28.08 %) compared to the extramaxillary approach (21.92 %) (P = 0.011). The correlation between 3D BIC% and high bone stress was stronger in the intrasinus approach, likely due to increased contact area in cortical bone.

Conclusion: The intrasinus approach led to lower bone stress and a more robust correlation between bone stress and 3D BIC%, particularly in cortical bone contact. Importantly, the coverage area of cortical bone surrounding the zygomatic implant significantly influenced biomechanical performance of the zygomatic implants.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同手术方式下颧骨种植体与骨的三维接触面积百分比比较研究:临床和生物力学视角。
背景:对于骨质严重萎缩的老年患者来说,颧骨种植体,无论是单独使用还是与牙种植体结合使用,都是一种可行的咬合修复手术选择。本研究旨在探讨在不同手术方法下,颧骨种植体与牙槽骨之间的三维接触面积对生物力学的影响:利用10名严重骨萎缩患者的锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)图像,我们重建了三维上颌骨模型,并创建了相应的三维颧骨种植体模型。根据每位患者颧骨种植体的位置和角度,我们采用了两种不同的手术方法(颌外或窦内方法)。计算了三维骨与种植体接触百分比(BIC%),并进行了非线性接触有限元分析,以评估两种手术方法的三维BIC%与周围骨应力之间的关系:在颧骨种植手术中,颌外入路法(57.63%)和窦内入路法(56.49%)的全骨(包括皮质骨和松质骨)三维BIC%相似(P=0.425)。相反,与颌外入路相比,窦内入路在皮质骨接触方面(28.08%)显示出更高的 3D BIC%(21.92%)(P=0.011)。窦内入路法的三维BIC%与高骨应力之间的相关性更强,这可能是由于皮质骨接触面积增大所致:结论:窦内入路可降低骨应力,骨应力与 3D BIC% 之间的相关性更强,尤其是在皮质骨接触部位。重要的是,颧骨种植体周围皮质骨的覆盖面积极大地影响了颧骨种植体的生物力学性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
9.10%
发文量
305
期刊介绍: J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg publishes research papers and techniques - (guest) editorials, original articles, reviews, technical notes, case reports, images, letters to the editor, guidelines - dedicated to enhancing surgical expertise in all fields relevant to oral and maxillofacial surgery: from plastic and reconstructive surgery of the face, oral surgery and medicine, … to dentofacial and maxillofacial orthopedics. Original articles include clinical or laboratory investigations and clinical or equipment reports. Reviews include narrative reviews, systematic reviews and meta-analyses. All manuscripts submitted to the journal are subjected to peer review by international experts, and must: Be written in excellent English, clear and easy to understand, precise and concise; Bring new, interesting, valid information - and improve clinical care or guide future research; Be solely the work of the author(s) stated; Not have been previously published elsewhere and not be under consideration by another journal; Be in accordance with the journal''s Guide for Authors'' instructions: manuscripts that fail to comply with these rules may be returned to the authors without being reviewed. Under no circumstances does the journal guarantee publication before the editorial board makes its final decision. The journal is indexed in the main international databases and is accessible worldwide through the ScienceDirect and ClinicalKey Platforms.
期刊最新文献
Maxillofacial surgery in Angola: overcoming challenges, advancing care through online collaboration. Immediate full-arch rehabilitation of edentulous jaws on 4 or 6 implants using a photogrammetry system: A retrospective study up to 2 years of follow-up. The effectiveness of onodera`s prognostic nutritional in predicting the prognosis of tongue squamous cell carcinoma. The Role of Postoperative Radiation Therapy in Early-stage Tongue Carcinoma. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Facemask Application With Fixed Orthodontic Appliances: 3-Dimensional Finite Element Stress Analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1