Zygomatic implants in intra-sinus versus extra-maxillary approaches for prosthetic rehabilitation in severely atrophic maxillae. Finite element analysis

Q4 Dentistry Journal of Oral Research Pub Date : 2022-08-31 DOI:10.17126/joralres.2022.042
Juan Aristizábal-Hoyos, Juan Aristizábal-Mulett, Olga López-Soto, Jackeline Mulett-Vásquez, Jessica Bazurto-Aguirre, Yuleisi Zambrano-Elizondo
{"title":"Zygomatic implants in intra-sinus versus extra-maxillary approaches for prosthetic rehabilitation in severely atrophic maxillae. Finite element analysis","authors":"Juan Aristizábal-Hoyos, Juan Aristizábal-Mulett, Olga López-Soto, Jackeline Mulett-Vásquez, Jessica Bazurto-Aguirre, Yuleisi Zambrano-Elizondo","doi":"10.17126/joralres.2022.042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objetive: To compare the stresses and deformations generated on the surrounding bone of the zygomatic implants when using an intra sinusal and extra-maxillary approach, through the finite element method. Material and Methods: Computer aided designs (CADs) were constructed using SolidWorks Software of a skull with bone resorption to be rehabilitated through a fixed hybrid prosthesis using two zygomatic and two conventional straight implants. For the boundary conditions (load conditions), symmetry in the sagittal plane was assumed and that all the materials were isotropic, homogeneous and linearly elastic. Two zygomatic implantation techniques were simulated: intra sinusal (Is) and extra maxillary (Em). Vertical and lateral loads of 150 N and 50 N were applied to the finite element models to obtain Von Mises equivalent stress and strain (displacement). Results: The average measurement of the Von Mises stress (MPa) recorded were as follows: Approach of the implant body (Is: 0.24- Em: 0.28,) effort of implant body with vertical load: Is: 0.69 - Em: 0.96; effort of peri-implant surface under horizontal load: Is: 2.11 - Em: 0.94. Average displacement under vertical load of peri-implant surface Is: 0.35 - Em: 0.40, and of implant body Is: 1.34 - Em: 2.04. Average total deformation in approach Is: 2.23 mm - Em: 0.80mm, and average total deformation in the implant body under horizontal load was Is: 0.14 - Em: 0.21. Conclusion: The results of this study indicate that despite the differences that occurred in both stress and strain (displacement) between the intra-sinus and extra-maxillary approaches, the static strength of the bone, which is approximately 150 MPa in tension and 250 MPa in compression was not exceeded. Considering the limitations of finite element analysis, there seems to be no biomechanical reason to choose one approach over the other.","PeriodicalId":16625,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oral Research","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oral Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17126/joralres.2022.042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objetive: To compare the stresses and deformations generated on the surrounding bone of the zygomatic implants when using an intra sinusal and extra-maxillary approach, through the finite element method. Material and Methods: Computer aided designs (CADs) were constructed using SolidWorks Software of a skull with bone resorption to be rehabilitated through a fixed hybrid prosthesis using two zygomatic and two conventional straight implants. For the boundary conditions (load conditions), symmetry in the sagittal plane was assumed and that all the materials were isotropic, homogeneous and linearly elastic. Two zygomatic implantation techniques were simulated: intra sinusal (Is) and extra maxillary (Em). Vertical and lateral loads of 150 N and 50 N were applied to the finite element models to obtain Von Mises equivalent stress and strain (displacement). Results: The average measurement of the Von Mises stress (MPa) recorded were as follows: Approach of the implant body (Is: 0.24- Em: 0.28,) effort of implant body with vertical load: Is: 0.69 - Em: 0.96; effort of peri-implant surface under horizontal load: Is: 2.11 - Em: 0.94. Average displacement under vertical load of peri-implant surface Is: 0.35 - Em: 0.40, and of implant body Is: 1.34 - Em: 2.04. Average total deformation in approach Is: 2.23 mm - Em: 0.80mm, and average total deformation in the implant body under horizontal load was Is: 0.14 - Em: 0.21. Conclusion: The results of this study indicate that despite the differences that occurred in both stress and strain (displacement) between the intra-sinus and extra-maxillary approaches, the static strength of the bone, which is approximately 150 MPa in tension and 250 MPa in compression was not exceeded. Considering the limitations of finite element analysis, there seems to be no biomechanical reason to choose one approach over the other.
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
颧种植体在鼻窦内与上颌外入路对严重萎缩上颌修复康复的影响。有限元分析
目的:通过有限元法比较颧骨种植体采用窦内入路和上颌外入路时对周围骨产生的应力和变形。材料与方法:采用SolidWorks软件对有骨吸收的颅骨进行计算机辅助设计(cad),并采用两根颧骨和两根传统直骨假体进行固定混合假体修复。对于边界条件(载荷条件),假设矢状面对称,所有材料均为各向同性、均质和线弹性。模拟了两种颧骨植入技术:窦内(Is)和上颌外(Em)。有限元模型分别施加150 N和50 N的竖向和侧向载荷,得到Von Mises等效应力和应变(位移)。结果:记录的Von Mises应力(MPa)的平均测量值为:种植体接近(Is: 0.24- Em: 0.28)垂直载荷下种植体的作用力:Is: 0.69 - Em: 0.96;水平荷载作用下种植体周围表面的作用力:Is: 2.11 - Em: 0.94。垂直载荷作用下种植体周围表面的平均位移为0.35 - Em: 0.40,种植体的平均位移为1.34 - Em: 2.04。入路平均总变形Is: 2.23 mm - Em: 0.80mm,水平荷载作用下种植体平均总变形Is: 0.14 - Em: 0.21。结论:本研究结果表明,尽管窦内入路和上颌外入路在应力和应变(位移)方面存在差异,但骨的静强度并未超过150mpa的拉伸和250mpa的压缩。考虑到有限元分析的局限性,似乎没有生物力学上的理由来选择一种方法而不是另一种方法。
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
Journal of Oral Research
Journal of Oral Research Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Oral Research which is published every two month, is devoted to the dissemination of knowledge in oral and craniofacial sciences, including: oral surgery and medicine and rehabilitation, craniofacial surgery, dentistry, orofacial pain and motor disorders, head and neck surgery, speech and swallowing disorders, and other related disciplines. Journal of Oral Research publishes original research articles and brief communications, systematic reviews, study protocols, research hypotheses, reports of cases, comments and perspectives. Indexed by Scopus, DOAJ, LILACS, Latindex, IMBIOMED, DIALNET,REDIB and Google Scholar. Journal of Oral Research is a member of COPE.
期刊最新文献
Preventive program based on multiple intelligences to promote oral health in disabled children from Chiclayo, Peru Effectiveness of lip repositioning in the treatment of excessive gingival display: systematic review and meta-analysis Camellia sinensis, a natural product to support the treatment of medical and stomatological conditions In vitro comparison of marginal infiltration between a conventional resin and a bulk-fill resin, in the relocation of cervical margins technique Characteristics of the bachelor thesis in dentistry, Satisfaction and motivations of the students
×
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