Submodelling approach to screw-to-bone interaction in additively manufactured subperiosteal implant structures.
AMSIS
ad hoc prosthesis
dental implant
finite element method
screw-to-bone contact
submodelling
subperiosteal implant structures
Journal
International journal for numerical methods in biomedical engineering
ISSN: 2040-7947
Titre abrégé: Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101530293
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2023
02 2023
Historique:
revised:
01
11
2022
received:
01
07
2022
accepted:
17
12
2022
pubmed:
22
12
2022
medline:
15
2
2023
entrez:
21
12
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Thanks to new digital technologies, complex cases of severe maxillary atrophy may now be treated with additively manufactured subperiosteal implant structures (AMSISs). However, there are few studies addressing this topic and most of them focus on the mechanical behaviour of the AMSIS itself without considering its interaction with the maxilla bone. The aim of this study is to provide a methodology based on finite element analysis (FEA) to evaluate the effect of interaction between the maxilla bone and the screws fixing the AMSIS. The mechanical performance of an AMSIS was examined via a FEA based on submodelling. Significant differences were encountered in displacements and reaction forces when bone-screw interaction was considered. Stress in the cortical layer was found to be close to the maximum strength while the trabecular layer seems to have no effect on the results; stresses in the AMSIS are lower than the fatigue stress limit. Finally, the comparison of stresses between models with and without osseointegration shows how stresses drop once osseointegration is complete. The proposed submodelling approach considerably reduces the computational effort and enables both a detailed model of the interaction between the thread of the screws and the bone and an accurate evaluation of displacement and stress fields on the interface. The results have shown that stresses in the cortical bone are highly affected by the initial geometry of the thread inside the bone, which demonstrates the importance of modelling the effect of the thread.
Substances chimiques
Dental Implants
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e3672Informations de copyright
© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
FOR. Foundation for Oral Rehabilitation. Accessed September 2022. https://www.for.org/en/resources/infographics/10-facts-about-dental-implants.
Statistics. Stats and facts database. Accessed September 2022. https://www.statisticsdatabase.com/facts/implant-denture-statistics/.
Vosselman N, Merema BJ, Schepman KP, Raghoebar GM. Patient-specific sub-periosteal zygoma implant for prosthetic rehabilitation of large maxillary defects after oncological resection. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019;48(1):115-117.
Gellrich N, Zimmerer RM, Spalthoff S, et al. A customised digitally engineered solution for fixed dental rehabilitation in severe bone deficiency: a new innovative line extension in implant dentistry. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017;45(10):1632-1638.
Baca L, Gao B, Rodríguez R. Subperiosteal implants: current state and literature review. Paper presented at: XII Jornadas Complutenses, XI Congreso Nacional de Investigación en Ciencias de la Salud para Alumnos; 2018; Madrid.
Mounir M, Atef M, Abou-Elfetouh A, Hakam M. Titanium and polyether ether ketone (PEEK) patient-specific sub-periosteal implants: two novel approaches for rehabilitation of the severely atrophic anterior maxillary ridge. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;47(5):658-664.
Buser D, Sennerby L, De Bruyn H. Modern implant dentistry based on osseointegration: 50 years of progress, current trends and open questions. Periodontol 2000. 2000;73:7-21. 207.
Ângelo D, Vieira Ferreira J. The role of custom-made subperiosteal implants for rehabilitation of atrophic jaws - a case report. Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2020;10(2):207-5011.
Silvestri K, Carlotti A. Subperiosteal implant: serving the dental profession for over 50 years. R I Dent J. 1995;28(1):3-11.
Linkow L, Wagner J, Chanavaz M. Tripodal mandibular subperiosteal implant: basic sciences, operational procedures, and clinical data. J Oral Implantol. 1998;24(1):16-36.
Weiss C, Reynolds T. Special report: a collective conference on the utilization of subperiosteal implants in implant dentistry. J Oral Implantol. 2000;26(2):127-128.
Mangano F, Bazzoli M, Tettamanti L, et al. TI - Custom-made, selective laser sintering (SLS) blade implants as a non-conventional solution for the prosthetic rehabilitation of extremely atrophied posterior mandible. Lasers Med Sci. 2013;28(5):1241-1247.
Cerea M, Dolcini GA. Custom-made direct metal laser sintering titanium subperiosteal implants: a retrospective clinical study on 70 patients. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:5420391.
Mangano C, Bianchi A, Mangano F, et al. Custom-made 3D printed subperiosteal titanium implants for the prosthetic restoration of the atrophic posterior mandible of elderly patients: a case series. 3D Print Med. 2020;1(6):1-14.
Lavorgna L, Cervino G, Fiorillo L, et al. Reliability of a virtual prosthodontic project realized through a 2D and 3D photographic acquisition: an experimental study on the accuracy of different digital systems. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(24):5139.
Carnicero A, Peláez A, Restoy-Lozano A, Jacquott I, Perera R. Improvement of an additively manufactured subperiosteal implant structure design by finite elements based topological optimization. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):15390.
Gellrich N, Rahlf B, Zimmerer R, Pott P, Rana M. A new concept for implant-borne dental rehabilitation; how to overcome the. Head Face Med. 2017;13(1):17.
Bilhan H. An alternative method to treat a case with severe maxillary atrophy by the use of angled implants instead of complicated augmentation procedures: a case report. J Oral Implantol. 2008;34(1):47-51.
Signorini L, Faustini F, Samarani R, Grandi T. Immediate fixed rehabilitation supported by pterygoid implants for participants with severe maxillary atrophy: 1-year postloading results from a prospective cohort study. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;126(1):67-75.
Moor ED, Huys SEF, Lenthe GH v, Mommaerts MY, Sloten JV. Mechanical evaluation of a patient-specific additively manufactured subperiosteal jaw implant (AMSJI) using finite-element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2022;51(3):405-411.
Vollmer A, Saravi B, Lang G, et al. Factors influencing primary and secondary implant stability-a retrospective cohort study with 582 implants in 272 patients. Appl Sci. 2020;10(22):8084.
Borre CV d, Rinaldi M, Neef BD, et al. Patient- and clinician-reported outcomes for the additively manufactured sub-periosteal jaw implant (AMSJI) in the maxilla: a prospective multicentre one-year follow-up study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2022;51(2):243-250.
Bai L, Zheng L, Ji L, et al. Additively manufactured lattice-like subperiosteal implants for rehabilitation of the severely atrophic ridge. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2022;8(2):912-920.
Mommaerts M. Evolutionary steps in the design and biofunctionalization of the additively manufactured sub-periosteal jaw implant ‘AMSJI’ for the maxilla. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019;48(1):108-114.
Cicciù M, Cervino G, Milone D, Risitano G. FEM investigation of the stress distribution over mandibular bone due to screwed overdenture positioned on dental implants. Materials. 2018;11(9):1-17.
Tetteh E, McCullough M. Impact of screw thread shape on stress transfer in bone: a finite element study. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2020;23(9):518-523.
Assunção W, Gomes E, Barão V, de Sousa E. Stress analysis in simulation models with or without implant threads representation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2009;24(6):1040-1044.
Hansson S, Werke M. The implant thread as a retention element in cortical bone: the effect of thread size and thread profile: a finite element study. J Biomech. 2003;36(9):1247-1258.
Kong L, Hu D, Song Y, Yang J, Wu Z, Liu B. Evaluation of the cylinder implant thread height and width: a 3-dimensional finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008;23(1):65-74.
Xu M, Yang J, Lieberman IH, Haddas R. Finite element method-based study of pedicle screw-bone connection in pullout test and physiological spinal loads. Med Eng Phys. 2019;67:11-21.
Fiorillo L, Cicciù M, D'Amico C, Mauceri R, Oteri G, Cervino G. Finite element method and Von Mises investigation on bone response to dynamic stress with a novel conical dental implant connection. Biomed Res Int. 2020;2020:2976067.
ISO., ISO 5838. Implants for surgery - Metal bone screws with hexagonal drive connection, spherical under-surface of head, asymmetrical thread - Dimensions; 1991.
Osteoplac innovations. Accessed June 2021. https://www.osteoplac.com/.
Dhatrak P, Shirsat U, Sumanth S, Deshmukh V. Influence of cutting flutes on stress distribution for selected dental implants: numerical studies. Mater Today. 2020;38:2680-2686.
Lian Z, Guan H, Ivanovski S, Loo Y-C, Johnson NW, Zhang H. Effect of bone to implant contact percentage on bone remodelling surrounding a dental implant. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;39(7):690-698.
Chen L, He H, Li Y, Li T, Guo X, Wang R. Finite element analysis of stress at implant-bone interface of dental implants with different structures. Trans Nonferrous Met Soc Chin. 2011;21(7):1602-1610.
Guan H, Staden R v, Johnson NW, Loo Y-C. Dynamic modelling and simulation of dental implant insertion process-a finite element study. Finite Elem Anal Des. 2011;47(8):886-897.
Ishak MI, Sulaiman E. Finite element analysis of zygomatic implants in Intrasinus and Extramaxillary approaches for prosthetic rehabilitation in severely atrophic maxillae. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013;28(3):151-160.
Cicciù M, Cervino G, Milone D, Risitano G. FEM analysis of dental implant-abutment Interface overdenture components and parametric evaluation of equator® and locator® prosthodontics attachments. Materials. 2019;12(4):592.
Chang C-l, Chen C-S, Huang C-H, Hsu M-L. Finite element analysis of the dental implant using a topology optimization method. Med Eng Phys. 2012;34(7):999-1008.
Wang C, Fu G, Deng F. Difference of natural teeth and implant-supported restoration: a comparison of bone remodeling simulations. J Dent Sci. 2015;10(2):190-200.
Dorogoy A, Rittel D, Shemtov-Yona K, Korabi R. Modeling dental implant insertion. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2017;68:42-50.
Kayabasi O. Design methodology for dental implant using approximate solution techniques. J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;121(6):684-695.
Baggi L, Cappelloni I, Girolamo MD, Maceri F, Vairo G. The influence of implant diameter and length on stress distribution of osseointegrated implants related to crestal bone geometry: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;100(6):422-431.
Cos F d, Sánchez F, García P, Álvarez-Arenal A. Non-linear numerical analysis of a double-threaded titanium alloy dental implant by FEM. Appl Math Comput. 2008;206(2):952-967.
Liu X, Pang F, Li Y, et al. Effects of different positions and angles of implants in maxillary edentulous jaw on surrounding bone stress under dynamic loading: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Comput Math Methods Med. 2019;2019:1-9.
Miyamoto S, Ujigawa K, Kizu Y, Tonogi M, Yamane G. Biomechanical three-dimensional finite-element analysis of maxillary prostheses with implants. Design of number and position of implants for maxillary prostheses after hemimaxillectomy. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010;39(11):1120-1126.
Ujigawa K, Kato Y, Kizu Y, Tonogi M, Yamane G. Three-dimensional finite elemental analysis of zygomatic implants in craniofacial structures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;36(7):620-625.
Demenko V, Linetskiy I, Linetska L, Yefremov O. Load-carrying capacity of short implants in edentulous posterior maxilla: a finite element study. Med Eng Phys. 2019;71:30-37.
Kaman S, Atil F, Tekin U, et al. Stress analysis of zygomatic implants on the augmented maxillary sinus. Implant Dent. 2017;26(6):860-867.
Jörn D, Kohorst P, Besdo S, Rücker M, Stiesch M, Borchers L. Influence of lubricant on screw preload and stresses in a finite element model for a dental implant. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(2):340-348.
Greitemeier D, Palm F, Syassen F, Melz T. Fatigue performance of additive manufactured TiAl6V4 using electron and laser beam melting. Int J Fatigue. 2017;94:211-217.
Gerhardt L, Boccaccini AR. Bioactive glass and glass-ceramic scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Materials. 2010;3(7):3867-3910.