Custom-made Subperiosteal Implants: A Finite Element Analysis on Monoblock and Dual Implant Systems in Atrophic Maxilla.


Journal

International journal of medical sciences
ISSN: 1449-1907
Titre abrégé: Int J Med Sci
Pays: Australia
ID NLM: 101213954

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2023
Historique:
received: 23 08 2023
accepted: 11 10 2023
medline: 7 11 2023
pubmed: 6 11 2023
entrez: 6 11 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

This study aims to investigate and compare the stress distribution, displacement, and bone loading of monoblock and dual custom-made subperiosteal implant systems in atrophic maxilla using finite element analysis (FEA). A total of 11 patients with insufficient bone tissue for conventional implant treatment were included in the study. Customized subperiosteal implant designs were generated using the 3D average models obtained from patients' computed tomography (CT) scans. Two different models were produced: a monoblock that covered the entire maxillary bone and a dual implant system where two mirror-imaged implants covered the left and right halves of the maxillary bone separately. We have calculated residual stress values formed on the implant models and jaw bone models separately. In addition, the highest displacement values formed on the implants and the highest stress values formed on abutment parts have also been observed in this study. Results showed that the stresses formed on implants that are under the mastication forces were significantly lower than the yield strength of the selected material, indicating that plastic deformation would not occur under static load. The dual implant geometry demonstrated a substantial reduction in stress compared to the monoblock structure. The highest von Mises stress values for the monoblock implants ranged from 131 MPa to 206 MPa, while those for the dual structure ranged from 124 MPa to 178 MPa. The highest residual stress values on the upper jawbone were observed in the M6 implant model, and the lowest was seen in the M1 and M3 models at 12 MPa. Displacement values under static load showed that loads on the implant would be below 0.21 mm. In conclusion, custom subperiosteal implants are a viable treatment option for patients with insufficient bone tissue for conventional implants. Dual implant systems were found to have lower stress and displacement values compared to monoblock structures, indicating a potential advantage in clinical use. However, mono implants may have benefits in cases of immediate teeth loading due to their ability to absorb and distribute occlusal forces better.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37928878
doi: 10.7150/ijms.89411
pii: ijmsv20p1755
pmc: PMC10620867
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1755-1762

Informations de copyright

© The author(s).

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interest exists.

Références

J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2022 Sep;22(3):101731
pubmed: 36162883
3D Print Med. 2020 Jan 8;6(1):1
pubmed: 31915946
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011 Jul;22(7):691-698
pubmed: 21054551
J Prosthet Dent. 1983 Sep;50(3):399-410
pubmed: 6352924
ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2022 Feb 14;8(2):912-920
pubmed: 34984904
J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023 Feb;124(1S):101290
pubmed: 36152972
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2021 Jan-Feb;36(1):21-29
pubmed: 33600519
Anat Rec (Hoboken). 2010 Apr;293(4):618-29
pubmed: 20235319
Int J Implant Dent. 2019 Mar 19;5(1):11
pubmed: 30887237
J Oral Implantol. 1998;24(4):198-205
pubmed: 10321207
Ann Maxillofac Surg. 2020 Jul-Dec;10(2):507-511
pubmed: 33708606
Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2017 Sep/Oct;32(5):1162-1171
pubmed: 28906510
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017 Jul;46(7):938-940
pubmed: 28258795
J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2014 Sep-Dec;4(3):200-3
pubmed: 25737944
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019 Jan;48(1):108-114
pubmed: 30131272
J Periodontol. 2013 Nov;84(11):1586-98
pubmed: 23237585
Sci Rep. 2021 Jul 28;11(1):15390
pubmed: 34321582
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Oct 07;(4):CD003607
pubmed: 19821311
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1959 Jul;12(7):777-86
pubmed: 13674677

Auteurs

Mustafa Ayhan (M)

Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Istanbul, Turkey.

Abdulkadir Burak Cankaya (AB)

Istanbul University Faculty of Dentistry Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Istanbul, Turkey.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH