{"title":"Implant-assisted removable partial dentures: Part II. a systematic review of the effects of implant position on the biomechanical behavior.","authors":"Shinichiro Kuroshima, Muneteru Sasaki, Farah A Al-Omari, Yusuke Uto, Yoshikazu Ohta, Yusuke Uchida, Takashi Sawase","doi":"10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_23_00032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effects of implant placement sites on the biomechanical behavior of implant-assisted removable partial dentures (IARPDs) using finite element analysis (FEA).</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Two reviewers independently conducted manual searches of the PubMed, Scopus, and ProQuest databases for articles investigating implant location in IARPDs using FEA, according to the 2020 Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement. Studies published in English up to August 1, 2022, were included in the analysis based on the critical question.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven articles meeting the inclusion criteria were systematically reviewed. Six studies investigated mandibular Kennedy Class I and one study investigated mandibular Kennedy Class II. Implant placement reduced the displacement and stress distribution of the IARPD components, including dental implants and abutment teeth, regardless of the Kennedy Class type and dental implant placement site. Most of the included studies showed that, based on the biomechanical behavior, the molar region, rather than the premolar region, is the preferred implant placement site. None of the selected studies investigated the maxillary Kennedy Class I and II.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Based on the FEA regarding mandibular IARPDs, we concluded that implant placement in both the premolar and molar regions improves the biomechanical behaviors of IARPD components, regardless of the Kennedy Class. Implant placement in the molar region results in more suitable biomechanical behaviors compared with implant placement in the premolar region in Kennedy Class I. No conclusion was reached for Kennedy Class II due to the lack of relevant studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_23_00032","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effects of implant placement sites on the biomechanical behavior of implant-assisted removable partial dentures (IARPDs) using finite element analysis (FEA).
Study selection: Two reviewers independently conducted manual searches of the PubMed, Scopus, and ProQuest databases for articles investigating implant location in IARPDs using FEA, according to the 2020 Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement. Studies published in English up to August 1, 2022, were included in the analysis based on the critical question.
Results: Seven articles meeting the inclusion criteria were systematically reviewed. Six studies investigated mandibular Kennedy Class I and one study investigated mandibular Kennedy Class II. Implant placement reduced the displacement and stress distribution of the IARPD components, including dental implants and abutment teeth, regardless of the Kennedy Class type and dental implant placement site. Most of the included studies showed that, based on the biomechanical behavior, the molar region, rather than the premolar region, is the preferred implant placement site. None of the selected studies investigated the maxillary Kennedy Class I and II.
Conclusions: Based on the FEA regarding mandibular IARPDs, we concluded that implant placement in both the premolar and molar regions improves the biomechanical behaviors of IARPD components, regardless of the Kennedy Class. Implant placement in the molar region results in more suitable biomechanical behaviors compared with implant placement in the premolar region in Kennedy Class I. No conclusion was reached for Kennedy Class II due to the lack of relevant studies.