
Comparative analysis of stress distribution in one-piece and two-piece implants with narrow and extra-narrow diameters: A finite element study
Author(s) -
Fabricia Teixeira Barbosa,
Luiz Carlos Silveira Zanatta,
Edélcio de Souza Rendohl,
Sérgio Alexandre Gehrke
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0245800
Subject(s) - implant , von mises yield criterion , finite element method , materials science , cortical bone , cancellous bone , abutment , stress (linguistics) , dentistry , orthodontics , biomedical engineering , structural engineering , medicine , surgery , anatomy , engineering , linguistics , philosophy
Objectives The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the stress distribution on three implant models with narrow and extra-narrow diameters using the finite element method (FEA). Materials and methods Dental implants of extra-narrow diameter of 2.5 mm for a one-piece implant (group G1), a narrow diameter of 3.0 mm for a one-piece implant (group G2) and a narrow diameter of 3.5 mm for a two-piece implant with a Morse taper connection (group G3). A three-dimensional model was designed with cortical and cancellous bone, a crown and an implant/abutment set of each group. Axial and angled (30°) loads of 150 N was applied. The equivalent von Mises stress was used for the implants and peri-implant bone plus the Mohr-Coulomb analysis to confirm the data of the peri-implant bone. Results In the axial load, the maximum stress value of the cortical bone for the group G1 was 22.35% higher than that the group G2 and 321.23% than the group G3. Whereas in angled load, the groups G1 and G2 showing a similar value (# 3.5%) and a highest difference for the group G3 (391.8%). In the implant structure, the group G1 showed a value of 2188MPa, 93.6% higher than the limit. Conclusions The results of this study show that the extra-narrow one-piece implant should be used with great caution, especially in areas of non-axial loads, whereas the one- and two-piece narrow-diameter implants show adequate behavior in both directions of the applied load.