English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Aim: The purpose of this study is to compare the stress formations of two different implant designs in augmented maxillary sinuses using the three-dimensional (3D) finite elements analysis method.  Material and Methods: A 3D model of atrophic posterior maxilla involving the maxillary sinus was created with computer software by using a computerized tomography image of a real patient. Similarly, implants in two different designs, prosthetic superstructures, and graft applied maxillary sinus were simulated. Four groups were obtained in total with two types of implants (Ankyos: A, Xive: X) with different designs, and two different scenerarios including control models (A1 and X1) without maxillary sinuses and maxilla models with grafted maxillary sinuses (A2 and X2). In these groups, stress analysis on cortical bone, trabecular bone and graft material were conducted under the forces close to real masticatory forces. Results: Tension-type stresses in cortical bone as a result of vertical loading, was lower in X Groups. When control group models were compared with maxillar sinus augmentation (MSA) models, no significant difference was revealed. In trabecular bone and graft material, no significant difference was revealed except for the A2 model which generated lower stresses. Compression-type stresses in cortical bone as a result of vertical loading, less stress formation was observed in Group A models. When MSA models were compared, X2 group caused more stress formation. In control groups the results were similar. In trabecular bone and graft material, no significant difference was found. Tension-type stresses in cortical bone as a result of oblique loading, no significant differences were revealed. In trabecular bone and graft material, in all models, Group A caused significantly less stress. Compression-type stresses in cortical bone as a result of oblique loading, significantly less stress formation was measured in Group A models. When MSA models were compared, the implant in the X2 group led to more stress formation. In the control groups, the results were similar. In the tension-type stresses in trabecular bone and graft material, no significant difference was revealed except for the A2 model which led to less stress. The stress values formed on the graft material were quite close. Conclusion: Implant design with “V” shaped thread (Group X) caused more stress formation in almost all conditions, except vertical compression stresses caused by vertical loadings, in comparison to the models with square shaped thread form implants (Group A). Keywords: Dental implants; Finite element analysis; Implant design; Sinus floor augmentation OGMENTE MAKSILLER SINUS BOLGESINE UYGULANAN IKI FARKLI IMPLANT TASARIMININ OLUŞTURDUĞU STRESLERIN BIYOMEKANIK OLARAK KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI OZ Amac: Bu calismanin amaci 3 boyutlu (3D) sonlu elemanlar stres analizi yontemini kullanarak, posterior maksiller bolgede greft kullanilarak sinus tabani yukseltilmesi yapilmis orneklerde iki farkli implant tasariminin stres olusumuna etkilerini karsilastirmaktir. Gerec Ve Yontem: Gercek bir hastaya ait bilgisayarli tomografi goruntusu kullanilarak maksiller sinusu de iceren atrofik posterior maksillanin 3D modeli bilgisayar yazilimlari ile olusturulmustur. Benzer sekilde iki farkli tasarimda implant modelleri, protetik ust yapilar ve maksiller sinuse uygulanmak uzere greft materyali canlandirilmistir. Farkli tasarima sahip iki tip implant (Ankyos: A, Xive: X), maksiller sinusun ihmal edildigi kontrol modellerine (A1 ve X1) ve icerisine greft materyali yerlestirilen sinuse sahip maksilla modellerine yerlestirilerek (A2 ve X2) toplamda 4 grup elde edilmistir. Olusturulan bu gruplarda, teknik olanaklarin elverdigi olcude gercek yasamdaki cigneme kuvvetlerine benzer kuvvetler altinda kortikal, trabekuler ve greft materyali uzerinde olusan streslerin analizi yapilmistir. Bulgular: Vertikal kuvvetler karsisinda kortikal kemikte olusan gerilme stresleri X gruplarinda daha dusuk bulunmustur. Kontrol gruplari ile sinus ogmentasyonu (SO) gruplari karsilastirildiginda anlamli bir fark olusmamistir. Trabekuler kemik ve greft materyalinde daha dusuk stress olusturan A2 modeli haric diger modellerde anlamli fark olusmamistir. Vertikal kuvvetlere karsi olusan sikisma streslerinde, kortikal kemikte A gruplarinda daha dusuk stresler olculmustur. SO gruplarinda X2 modelinde daha yuksek stress olusmustur. Kontrol gruplarinda ise fark gozlenmemistir. Trabekuler kemik ve greft materyalinde ise bir fark gozlenmemistir. Oblik kuvvetler sonucu olusan gerilme steslerinde, kortikal kemikte bir fark bulunamamistir. Trabekuler kemik ve greft materyalinde ise A grubunda dusuk stress degeleri olusmustur. Oblik kuvvetlere karsi olusan sikisma tipi streslerde, kortikal kemikte A gruplarinda dusuk stresler gozlenmistir. SO gruplarinda X2 modeli daha yuksek stress olusturmustur. Kontrol gruplari arasinda ise fark bulunamamistir. Oblik kuvvetlere karsi olusan gerilme streslerinde, trabekuler kemik ve greft materyalinde, daha dusuk stresler olusan A2 modeli haricinde fark gozlenmemistir. Sonuc: Ucgen yiv tasarimli implantlara (Grup X) sahip modellerde, kare yiv tasariminda implantlara (Grup A) sahip modellere gore, vertikal kuvvetler sonucu olusan sikisma stresleri disinda, neredeyse her kosulda daha fazla stres olusumu gozlenmistir. Anahtar Kelimeler: Dental implant; Implant tasarimi; Sinus taban yukseltmesi; Sinirli eleman analizi

BIOMECHANICAL COMPARISON OF STRESSES GENERATED THROUGH TWO DIFFERENT DENTAL IMPLANT DESIGNS TO BE APPLIED IN AUGMENTED MAXILLARY SINUS