Asieh Mozaffari, Donya Hashtbaran, Alireza Moghadam, Shima Aalaei
{"title":"Stress Distribution in Peri-implant Bone in the Replacement of Molars with One or Two Implants: A Finite Element Analysis.","authors":"Asieh Mozaffari, Donya Hashtbaran, Alireza Moghadam, Shima Aalaei","doi":"10.30476/dentjods.2022.92584.1659","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Statement of the problem: </strong>In most cases, insertion of single implants with a standard diameter is used to replace a molar tooth but placing two implants with a narrow diameter seems to be a viable treatment modality to withstand functional and biomechanical forces.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate and compare stress distribution in the bone surrounding a single molar area rehabilitated by a single implant versus two implants with a narrow diameter.</p><p><strong>Materials and method: </strong>The study was conducted by computer-aided <i>in vitro</i> modeling. The initial model used a single implant, 4.8 mm wide in diameter, inserted with a 3.9-mm distance from both sides and 12.6-mm mesiodistal space. The second model used two 3.3-mm narrow-sized implants with a 3-mm distance from one another, 1.5 mm from both sides, and a 12.6-mm mesiodistal space. Following the completion of these models, a 100-N force was exerted obliquely, once in three locations and once in the mesial aspect of the implant-supported crown. Stress distribution was then measured using finite element analysis (FEA) with ANSYS Workbench software package in both models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The maximum stress in the bone around the single implant was less than that around double implants. The maximum stress of cortical bone in three-point loading was lower than mesial loading either in one (146.7 vs. 126.72 MPa) or two implants model (186.8 vs. 139.24).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>According to the results, because of more cortical bone contact area, the stress of surrounding bone in wide implant was decreased.</p>","PeriodicalId":73702,"journal":{"name":"Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran)","volume":"24 1 Suppl","pages":"132-137"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10084560/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of dentistry (Shiraz, Iran)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30476/dentjods.2022.92584.1659","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Statement of the problem: In most cases, insertion of single implants with a standard diameter is used to replace a molar tooth but placing two implants with a narrow diameter seems to be a viable treatment modality to withstand functional and biomechanical forces.
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate and compare stress distribution in the bone surrounding a single molar area rehabilitated by a single implant versus two implants with a narrow diameter.
Materials and method: The study was conducted by computer-aided in vitro modeling. The initial model used a single implant, 4.8 mm wide in diameter, inserted with a 3.9-mm distance from both sides and 12.6-mm mesiodistal space. The second model used two 3.3-mm narrow-sized implants with a 3-mm distance from one another, 1.5 mm from both sides, and a 12.6-mm mesiodistal space. Following the completion of these models, a 100-N force was exerted obliquely, once in three locations and once in the mesial aspect of the implant-supported crown. Stress distribution was then measured using finite element analysis (FEA) with ANSYS Workbench software package in both models.
Results: The maximum stress in the bone around the single implant was less than that around double implants. The maximum stress of cortical bone in three-point loading was lower than mesial loading either in one (146.7 vs. 126.72 MPa) or two implants model (186.8 vs. 139.24).
Conclusion: According to the results, because of more cortical bone contact area, the stress of surrounding bone in wide implant was decreased.