Edentulous mandible with four splinted interforaminal implants exposed to three different situations of trauma: A preliminary three-dimensional finite element analysis.
finite element analysis
four splinted interforaminal implants
stress value
trauma application
Journal
Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology
ISSN: 1600-9657
Titre abrégé: Dent Traumatol
Pays: Denmark
ID NLM: 101091305
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2020
Dec 2020
Historique:
received:
15
03
2020
revised:
22
04
2020
accepted:
23
04
2020
pubmed:
28
5
2020
medline:
15
12
2020
entrez:
28
5
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
An increasing number of elderly patients with implant-prosthodontic rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible frequently show increased life activity, and consequently, a greater number of aged patients is at risk for maxillofacial trauma. The aim of this 3-dimensional (3D) finite element analysis (FEA) was to evaluate the biomechanical effects of the edentulous mandible (EM) with and without four splinted interforaminal implants exposed to three different trauma applications including assessment of different mandibular fracture risk areas. In a 3D-FEA study design, EM with and without four splinted interforaminal implants were exposed to the application of 1000 N at the symphyseal, parasymphyseal, and mandibular angle region. On four pre-defined superficial cortical mandibular areas (symphysis region, mental foramen region, angle of mandible, and mandibular neck) representing regions of interest (ROI), the von Mises stresses were measured for the three trauma applications. For all ROIs, stress values were evaluated and compared for the different force application sites as well as between EM models with and without interforaminal implants. For EM with and without four splinted interformaninal implants, all traumatic loads generated the highest stress levels at the mandibular neck region. However, in the EM with four splinted interforaminal implants, an anterior symphyseal force application generated significantly (P < .01) increased stress values in the parasymphyseal (mental foramen) region than in EM without implants. For force applications at the parasymphaseal region (mental foramen) and at the angle of the mandible elevated, von Mises stress values were noted directly at the application sites without difference between edentulous mandibles with and without four interforaminal implants. In an edentulous mandible model with four splinted interforaminal implants, the condylar neck and the mental foramen represent the predilectional risk areas for mandibular fracture for both anterior symphyseal and lateral parasymphyseal force application.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND/AIM
OBJECTIVE
An increasing number of elderly patients with implant-prosthodontic rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible frequently show increased life activity, and consequently, a greater number of aged patients is at risk for maxillofacial trauma. The aim of this 3-dimensional (3D) finite element analysis (FEA) was to evaluate the biomechanical effects of the edentulous mandible (EM) with and without four splinted interforaminal implants exposed to three different trauma applications including assessment of different mandibular fracture risk areas.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
In a 3D-FEA study design, EM with and without four splinted interforaminal implants were exposed to the application of 1000 N at the symphyseal, parasymphyseal, and mandibular angle region. On four pre-defined superficial cortical mandibular areas (symphysis region, mental foramen region, angle of mandible, and mandibular neck) representing regions of interest (ROI), the von Mises stresses were measured for the three trauma applications. For all ROIs, stress values were evaluated and compared for the different force application sites as well as between EM models with and without interforaminal implants.
RESULTS
RESULTS
For EM with and without four splinted interformaninal implants, all traumatic loads generated the highest stress levels at the mandibular neck region. However, in the EM with four splinted interforaminal implants, an anterior symphyseal force application generated significantly (P < .01) increased stress values in the parasymphyseal (mental foramen) region than in EM without implants. For force applications at the parasymphaseal region (mental foramen) and at the angle of the mandible elevated, von Mises stress values were noted directly at the application sites without difference between edentulous mandibles with and without four interforaminal implants.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
In an edentulous mandible model with four splinted interforaminal implants, the condylar neck and the mental foramen represent the predilectional risk areas for mandibular fracture for both anterior symphyseal and lateral parasymphyseal force application.
Substances chimiques
Dental Implants
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
607-617Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Dental Traumatology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Thomason JM, Feine J, Exley C, Moynihan P, Müller F, Naert I, et al. Mandibular two implant-supported overdentures as the first choice standard of care for edentulous patients - the York Consensus Statement. Br Dent J. 2009;207:185-6.
Thomason JM, Kelly SA, Bendkowski A, Ellis JS. Two implant retained overdentures - a review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements. J Dent. 2012;40:22-34.
Carlsson GE, Omar R. The future of complete dentures in oral rehabilitation. A critical review. J Oral Rehabil. 2010;37:143-56.
Turkyilmaz I, Company AM, McGlumphy EA. Should edentulous patients be constrained to removable complete dentures? The use of dental implants to improve the quality of life for edentulous patients. Gerodontology. 2010;27:3-10.
Melescanu Imre M, Marin M, Preoteasa E, Tancu AM, Preoteasa CT. Two implant overdenture - the first alternative treatment for patients with complete edentulous mandible. J Med Life. 2011;4:207-9.
McGlumphy EA, Hashemzadeh S, Yilmaz B, Purcell BA, Leach D, Larsen PE. Treatment of edentulous mandible with metal-resin fixed complete dentures: a 15-to 20-year retrospective study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019;30:817-25.
Malo P, de Araujo NM, Lopes A, Ferro A, Botto J. The All-on-4 treatment concept for the rehabilitation of the completely edentulous mandible: a longitudinal study with 10 to 18 years of follow-up. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019;21:565-77.
ELsyad M, Alameldeen H, Elsaih E. Four-implant-supported fixed prosthesis and milled bar overdentures for rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible: a 1-year randomized controlled clinical and radiographic study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019;34:1493-503.
Gallucci GO, Doughtie CB, Hwang JW, Fiorellini JP, Weber HP. Five-year results of fixed implant-supported rehabilitations with distal cantilevers for the edentulous mandible. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2009;20:601-7.
Krennmair G, Seemann R, Weinländer M, Krennmair S, Piehslinger E. Clinical outcome and peri-implant findings of four-implant-supported distal cantilevered fixed mandibular prostheses: five-year results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013;28:831-40.
Ayub KV, Ayub EA, do Valle A, Bonfante G, Pegoraro T, Pegoraro L. Seven- year follow-up of full arch prostheses supported by four implants: a prospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017;32:1351-8.
Plawecki A, Bobian M, Kandinov A, Svider PF, Folbe AJ, Eloy JA, et al. Recreat-ional activity and facial trauma among older adults. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2017;19:453-8.
Ruslin M, Boffano P, ten Brincke YJ, Forouzanfar T, Brand HS. Sport-related maxillo-facial fractures. J Craniofac Surg. 2016;27:e91-e94.
Goldschmidt MJ, Castiglione CL, Assael LA, Litt MD. Craniomaxillofacial trauma in the elderly. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1995;53:1145-9.
Sidal T, Curtis DA. Fractures of the mandible in the aging population. Spec Care Dentist. 2006;26:145-9.
Halpern LR, Flynn TR. Oral and maxillofacial trauma in the geriatric patient. In: Fonseca RJ, Walker RV, Betts NJ, Barber HD, Powers MP, editors. Oral and Maxillofacial Trauma, 3rd ed., vol. 2. St Louis: Saunders Elsevier; 2005. p. 1001-5.
Toivari M, Helenius M, Suominen AL, Lindqvist C, Thoren H. Etiology of facial fractures in elderly Finns during 2006-2007. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2014;118:539-45.
Nogami S, Yamauchi K, Bottini GB, Otake Y, Sai Y, Morishima H, et al. Fall-related mandible fractures in a Japanese population: a retrospective study. Dent Traumatol. 2019;35:194-8.
Afrooz PN, Bykowski MR, James IB, Daniali LN, Clavijo-Alvarez JA. The epidemiology of mandibular fractures in the United States, Part 1: a review of 13,142 cases from the US National Trauma Data Bank. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73:2361-6.
Kan B, Coskunses FM, Mutlu I, Ugur L, Meral DG. Effects of inter-implant distance and implant length on the response to frontal traumatic force of two anterior implants in an atrophic mandible: three-dimensional finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;44:908-13.
Ayali A, Bilginayler K. Evaluating the biomechanical effects of implant diameter in case of facial trauma to an edentulous atrophicmandible: a 3 D finite element analysis. Head Face Med. 2017;13:5.
Gallas Torreira M, Fernandez JR. A three-dimensional computer model of the human mandible in two simulated standard trauma situations. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2004;32:303-7.
Santos LS, Rossi AC, Freire AR, Matoso RI, Caria PH, Prado FB. Finite-element analysis of 3 situations of trauma in the human edentulous mandible. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73:683-91.
Trivedi S. Finite element analysis: a boon to dentistry. J Oral Biol Craniofacial Res. 2014;4:200-3.
Torsiglieri T, Raith S, Rau A, Deppe H, Hölzle F, Steiner T. Stability of edentulous, atrophic mandibles after insertion of different dental implants. A biomechanical study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015;43:616-23.
Steiner T, Torsiglieri T, Rau A, Möhlhenrich SC, Eichhorn S, Grohmannn I, et al. Impairment of an atrophic mandible by preparation of the implant cavity: a biomechanical study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016;54:619-24.
Almasri M, El-Hakim M. Fracture of the anterior segment of the atrophic mandible related to dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;41:646-9.
Holberg C, Winterhalder P, Holberg N, Wichelhaus A, Rudzki-Janson I. Orthodontic bracket debonding: risk of enamel fracture. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;1:327-34.
Holberg C, Winterhalder P, Rudzki-Janson I, Wichelhaus A. Finite element analysis of mono- and bicortical mini-implant stability. Eur J Orthod. 2013;36:550-6.
Holberg C, Winterhalder P, Wichelhaus A, Hickel R, Huth K. Fracture risk of lithium-disilicate ceramic inlays: a finite element analysis. Dent Mater. 2013;29:1244-50.
Ni N, Ye J, Wang L, Shen S, Han L, Wang Y. Stress distribution in a mandibular premolar after separated nickel-titanium instrument removal and root canal preparation: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Int Med Res. 2019;47:1555-64.
Kim KS, Kim YL, Bae JM, Cho HW. Biomechanical comparison of axial and tilted implants for mandibular full-arch fixed prostheses. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011;26:976-84.
Niinomi M, Liu Y, Nakai M, Liu H, Li H. Biomedical titanium alloys with Young's moduli close to that of cortical bone. Regen Biomater. 2016;3:173-85.
Geng JP, Tan KB, Liu GR. Application of finite element analysis in implant dentistry: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent. 2001;85:585-98.
Antic S, Vukicevic AM, Milasinovic M, Saveljic I, Jovicic G, Filipovic N, et al. Impact of the lower third molar presence and position on the fragility of mandibular angle and condyle: a three-dimensional finite element study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015;43:870-8.
Takada H, Abe S, Tamatsu Y, Mitarashi S, Saka H, Ide Y. Three-dimensional bone microstructures of the mandibular angle using micro-CT and finite element analysis: relationship between partially impacted mandibular third molars and angle fractures. Dent Traumatol. 2006;22:18-24.
Bezerra TP, Silva FI Jr, Scarparo HC, Costa FW, Studart-Soares EC. Do erupted third molars weaken the mandibular angle after trauma to the chin region? A 3D finite element study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;42:474-80.
Knapik A, Brzek A, Famula-Waz A, Gallert-Kopyto W, Szydlak D, Marcisz C, et al. The relationship between physical fitnesss and health self-assessment in elderly. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98:e15984.
Schwartz-Dabney CL, Dechow PC. Variations in cortical material properties throughout the human dentate mandible. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2003;120:252-77.
Bujtár P, Sándor GK, Bojtos A, Szucs A, Barabas J. Finite element analysis of the human mandible at different stages of life. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010;110:301-9.
Prado FB, Rossi AC, Freire AR, Ferreira Caria PH. The application of finite element analysis in the skull biomechanics and dentistry. Indian J Dent Res. 2014;25:390-7.
Liu YF, Wang R, Baur DA, Jiang XF. A finite element analysis of the stress distribution to the mandible from impact forces with various orientations of third molars. J Zhenjiang Univ Sci B. 2018;19:38-48.
Viano JM, Burguera M, Fdez-Garcia JR. A 3D FEM simulation of highest stress lines in mandible fractures by elastic impact. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2000;3:273-85.
El-Anwar MW, Sweed AH, Abdulmonaem G. Mental foramen relation to mandibular fracture. J Craniofac Surg. 2016;27:e743-e745.
Cornelius CP, Augustin JB, Sailer LK. External pin fixation for stabilization of the mandible-comeback of a method: historical review and first experiences with the ‘mandible external fixator’. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;13:1-14.
Braidy HF, Ziccardi VB. External fixation for mandible fractures. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2009;17:45-53.
Ellis E 3rd, Muniz O, Anand K. Treatment considerations for comminuted mandibular fractures. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003;61:861-70.
Krennmair S, Winterhalder P, Hunger S, Rupperti S, Holberg C. The effects of frontal trauma on 4 interforaminal dental implants: a 3-dimensional finite element analysis comparing splinted and unsplinted implant configurations. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;78(6):961-972.
King RE, Scianna JM, Petruzzelli GJ. Mandible fracture patterns: a suburban trauma center experience. Am J Otolaryngol. 2004;25:301-7.
Ogundare BO, Bonnick A, Bayley N. Pattern of mandibular fractures in an urban major trauma center. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003;61:713-8.
Choi KY, Yang JD, Chung HY, Cho BC. Current concepts in the mandibular condyle fracture management part I. overview of condylar fracture. Arch Plast Surg. 2012;39:291-300.
Gupta M, Iyer N, Das D, Nagaraj J. Analysis of different treatment protocols for fractures of condylar process of mandible. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012;70:83-91.
Munante-Cardenas JL, Facchina Nunes PH, Passeri LA. Etiology, treatment, and complications of mandibular fractures. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26:611-5.
Brucoli M, Boffano P, Romeo I, Corio C, Benech A, Ruslin M, et al. The epidemiology of edentulous atrophic mandibular fractures in Europe. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2019;47:1929-34.