Stress distribution in implant-supported prostheses using different connection systems and cantilever lengths: digital photoelasticity

Stress distribution analysis of novel dental mini-implant designs to support overdenture prosthesis

This study aimed to test and compare two novel dental mini-implant designs to support overdentures with a commercial model, regarding the stress distribution, by photoelastic analysis. Three different mini-implant designs (Ø 2.0 mm × 10 mm) were tested: G1-experimental threaded (design with threads and 3 longitudinal and equidistant self-cutting chamfers), G2-experimental helical (design with 2 long self-cutting chamfers in the helical arrangement), and G3-Intra-Lock® System. After including the mini-implants in a photoelastic resin, they were subjected to a static load of 100 N under two situations: axial and inclined model (30°). The fringe orders (n), that represents the intensity of stresses were analyzed around the mini-implants body and quantified using Tardy's method that calculates the maximum shear stress (τ) value in each point selected. In axial models, less stress was observed in the cervical third mini-implants, mainly in G1 and G2. In inclined models (30°), higher stresses were generated on the opposite side of the load application, mainly in the cervical third of G2 and G3. All mini-implant models presented lower tensions in the cervical third compared with the middle and apical third. The new mini-implants tested (G1 and G2) showed lower stresses than the G3 in the cervical third under axial load, while loading in the inclined model generated greater stresses in the cervical of G2.

Peri-implantitis Update: Risk Indicators, Diagnosis, and Treatment

Despite the success rates of dental implants, peri-implantitis presents as the most common complication in implant dentistry. This review discusses various factors associated with peri-implantitis and various available treatments, highlighting their advantages and disadvantages. Relevant articles on peri-implantitis published in English were reviewed from August 2010 to April 2020 in MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and ScienceDirect. The identified risk indicators of peri-implant diseases are plaque, smoking, history of periodontitis, surface roughness, residual cement, emergence angle >30 degrees, radiation therapy, keratinized tissue width, and function time of the implant, sex, and diabetes. Peri-implantitis treatments can be divided into nonsurgical (mechanical, antiseptic, and antibiotics), surface decontamination (chemical and laser), and surgical (air powder abrasive, resective, and regenerative). However, mechanical debridement alone may fail to eliminate the causative bacteria, and this treatment should be combined with other treatments (antiseptics and surgical treatment). Surface decontamination using chemical agents may be used as an adjuvant treatment; however, the definitive clinical benefit is yet not proven. Laser treatment may result in a short-term decrease in periodontal pocket depth, while air powder abrasive is effective in cleaning a previously contaminated implant surface. Surgical elimination of a pocket, bone recontouring and plaque control are also effective for treating peri-implantitis. The current evidence indicates that regenerative approaches to treat peri-implant defects are unpredictable.

A Comparison of Photoelastic and Finite Elements Analysis in Internal Connection and Bone Level Dental Implants

This study is a contribution to our understanding of the mechanical behaviour of dental implants through the use of the finite element and the photoelastic methods. Two internal connection and bone level dental implants with different design have been analysed (M-12 by Oxtein S.L., Zaragoza, Spain, and ASTRA, from Dentsply Sirona, Charlotte, NC, USA), evaluating the stress distribution produced by axial stresses and a comparison has been established between them, as well as between the two methods used, in order to validate the adopted hypotheses and correlate the numerical modelling performed with experimental tests. To load the implant in laboratory testing, a column was placed, such that the loading point was about 9.3 mm from the upper free surface of the resin plate. This column connects the implant with the weights used to define the test load. In turn, support for both plates was achieved by two 6 mm bolts 130 mm apart and located on a parallel line with the resin (flush with the maximum level of the implant), at a depth of 90 mm. The results obtained with both methods used were similar enough. The comparison of results is fundamentally visual, but ensures that, at least in the range of forces used, both methods are similar. Therefore, the photoelastic method can be used to confirm in a real way the virtual conditions of the finite element models, with the implications in the investigation of dental implants that this entails.

Is Anterior Guidance a Key Factor on Planning Implant Treatment for Free-End Missing in the Posterior Mandible?

To perform safe implant treatment, the anatomical structure and bone quality at implant placement sites are evaluated based on a patient's computerized tomography (CT) data, but there is no definite method to determine placement sites and the appropriate number of implants. The objective of this study was to investigate the influence of the number and arrangement of implants on the stress distribution in 3-unit posterior fixed partial dentures for the posterior mandible by mechanical analysis using the finite element method. Three-dimensional finite element analysis models were constructed from the CT data of a patient with missing mandibular teeth (Nos. 35, 36, 37). Implant placement was simulated under various conditions. Superstructures were connected and fixed with a titanium frame. As the loading conditions, 400 N vertical and lateral loads (45° on the lingual side and 45° on the buccal side) were applied to the upper areas of Nos. 35, 36, and 37, and the stress distribution and frame displacement were evaluated. When a vertical force was applied, no difference of the von Mises stress was noted among the 5 experimental conditions. When lateral force was applied from the lingual and buccal sides at 45°, the stress was higher than that induced by vertical force under all conditions, and it was especially high under mesial and distal cantilever conditions. When displacement of the titanium frame was measured, the displacement caused by lateral force was greater than that due to vertical force. In addition, comparison between long and short distal cantilever bridges revealed that displacement of the titanium frame tended to be smaller when the short cantilever was used. These findings suggested that the stress on peri-implant tissues and displacement of the titanium frame vary depending on the configuration and number of implants, with greater stress and more marked displacement of the titanium frame being induced by lateral force when the number of implants is reduced and a cantilever bridge is selected.

Biomechanical evaluation of spring system for implant-supported prosthesis: analysis by photoelasticity and extensometry

New systems are released in the odontological market with the objective of bringing improvements and advancements in the clinical success of implants and implant-supported prostheses. The distribution of tension for the bone/implant system of these new systems is important. The purpose of this work was to evaluate, by photoelastic analysis and strain gauges, the distribution of tension for the bone/implant system, using the Slim system. A photoelastic cast with an external hexagon implant was manufactured and a metal prosthesis was screwed below it, with or without the tested system. For the photoelasticity methodology, a photoelastic cast, with or without the tested system, was positioned in a circular polariscope, and axial loads of 100 N were applied to the centre of the crown. The pattern of tension generated was photographed and analysed qualitatively in an imaging programme. For the extensometry methodology, two extensometers were placed in the mesial and distal region of the implant in the photoelastic cast. The axial loads were applied to the group again, with or without the system (n = 10). The t test of independent samples with a significance level of 5% was used for this analysis. This study demonstrated greater tension values for both the photoelastic and extensometry methods when the tested system was used. Clinical studies must be performed to evaluate the tested system because the results might not be clinically significant to a bone reabsorption.