Premium
A Comparative Analysis on Two Types of Oral Implants, Bone‐Level and Tissue‐Level, with Different Cantilever Lengths of Fixed Prosthesis
Author(s) -
Mosavar Alireza,
Nili Monireh,
Hashemi Sayed Raouf,
Kadkhodaei Mahmoud
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
journal of prosthodontics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.902
H-Index - 60
eISSN - 1532-849X
pISSN - 1059-941X
DOI - 10.1111/jopr.12388
Subject(s) - cantilever , implant , materials science , von mises yield criterion , dentistry , prosthesis , cortical bone , mandible (arthropod mouthpart) , bone tissue , biomedical engineering , orthodontics , dental prosthesis , finite element method , medicine , anatomy , surgery , structural engineering , composite material , botany , biology , engineering , genus
Abstract Purpose Depending on esthetic, anatomical, and functional aspects, in implant‐prosthetic restoration of a completely edentulous jaw, the selection of implant type is highly important; however, bone‐ and tissue‐level implants and their stress distribution in bone have not yet been comparatively investigated. Hence, finite element analysis was used to study the influence of cantilever length in a fixed prosthesis on stress distribution in peri‐implant bone around these two types of oral implants. Materials and Methods A 3D edentulous mandible was modeled. In simulations, a framework with four posterior cantilever lengths and two types of implants, bone‐level and tissue‐level, was considered. A compressive load was applied to the distal regions of the cantilevers, and the von‐Mises stress of peri‐implant bone was investigated. The independent t ‐test and the Pearson correlation coefficient analyzed the results (α = 0.05). Results Stresses in the cortical bone around the bone‐level implants were greater than those in the tissue‐level implants with the same cantilever length. In addition, by extending the cantilever length, the stress values in peri‐implant bone increased. Therefore, when the cantilever was at its maximum length, the maximum stress was in cortical bone and around the bone‐level distal implants. Conclusion The results of the present study indicate that treatment with tissue‐level implants is potentially more advantageous than with bone‐level implants for implant‐supported fixed prostheses.