İMPLANT – PROTEZ BAĞLANTISINDA SONLU ELEMAN ANALİZ YÖNTEMİ

Year 2018, Volume: 28 Issue: 1, 91 - 97, 28.03.2018

Muhammet Emin Aksan Saadet Atsü Ali Can Bulut

https://doi.org/10.17567/ataunidfd.410478

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Stres
analizi yöntemleri ağız içi biyomekaniğin daha iyi anlaşılmasına yardımcı olup,
daha başarılı restorasyonlar yapılabilmesine imkan verdikleri için diş
hekimliği araştırmalarında uzun zamandır kullanılmaktadır. Sonlu eleman stres
analiz yöntemi birçok implant dizaynının biyomekanik performansının yanı sıra
klinik faktörlerin de implant başarısı üzerindeki etkisinin geniş bir biçimde incelenebildiği
bir yöntemdir.  Bu derleme çalışmasında
sonlu elemanlar stres analizi ve implant destekli protez uygulama alanlarıyla
ilgili genel bir bakış açısı sunulmaya çalışılmaktadır.

Anahtar kelimeler: Sonlu elemanlar stres analizi, stres dağılımı, implant, implant  protez
bağlantısı

FINITE ELEMENT
ANALYSIS OF IMPLANT PROSTHESUS CONNECTION

ABSTRACT

Stress
analysis techniques are being used in dental research for a long time because
of allowing more successful restorations by giving an aid to a better
understanding of biomechanics in the oral environment.  Finite element analysis (FEA) has been used
extensively to predict the biomechanical performance of various dental implant
designs as well as the effect of clinical factors on implant success. This
article efforts to give a general overview about finite element stress analysis
and its use in the implant-supported prosthesis.

Keywords: Finite element stress analysis,
stress distribution, implant, implant prosthesis connection

Keywords

Sonlu elemanlar stres analizi, stres dağılımı, implant

References

• 1. Taşkınsel E, Gümüş HÖ. Sonlu elemanlar stres analizi ve restoratif diş hekimliğinde kullanımı. Atatürk Üniv Diş Hek Fak Derg 2014; 8: 131-5.
• 2. Geng JP, Tan K, Liu G, Application of finite element analysis in implant dentistry: A review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2001; 85: 585-98.
• 3. Kayabaşı O, Yüzbaşıoğlu E, Erzincanlı F. Static, dynamic and fatigue behaviors of dental implant using finite element method. Advances in Engineering 2006; 37: 649–58.
• 4. Misch, CE. Dental Implant Prosthetics. 1st ed. St. Louis, Missouri: Elsevier Mosby 2005; 324-36.
• 5. Lisa A, Lang LA, Kang BB, Wang RF, Lang BR. Finite element analysis to determine implant preload. J Prosthet Dent 2003; 90: 539-46.
• 6. Silva GC, Cornacchia TM, Magalhães CS, Bueno AC, Moreira AN. Biomechanical evaluation of screw- and cement-retained implant-supported prostheses: A nonlinear finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2014; 112: 1479-88.
• 7. Ebadian B, Farzın M, Talebi S, Khodaeian N. Evaluation of stress distribution of implant‑retained mandibular overdenture with different vertical restorative spaces: A finite element analysis. Dent Res J 2012; 9: 117-21.
• 8. Liu J, Pan S, Dong J, Mo Z, Fan Y, Feng H. Influence of implant number on the biomechanical behaviour of mandibular implant-retained/ supported overdentures: A three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Dent 2013; 41: 241-9.
• 9. Dashti MH, Atashrazm P, Emadi MI, Mishaeel S, Banava S. The effects of two attachment types on the stresses introduced to the mandibular residualridge: A 3D finite element analysis. Quint Int Prosthod 2013; 44: 8.
• 10. Assuncao WG, Tabata LF, Barao VAR, Rocha EP. Comparison of stress distribution between complete denture and implant-retained overdenture-2D FEA, J Oral Rehabil 2008; 35: 766–74.
• 11. Prakash V, De Souza M, Adhikari R. A comparison of stress distribution and flexion among various designs of bar attachments for implant overdentures: A three dimensional finite element analysis Indian J Dent Res 2009; 20: 31-6.
• 12. Meriç G, Erkmen E, Kurt A, Tunç Y, Eser A. Influence of prosthesis type and material on the stress distribution in bone around implants: A 3-dimensional finite element analysis, J Dent Sci 2011; 6: 25-32.
• 13. Tsumita M, Kokubo Y, Von Steyern PV, Fukushima S, Effect of framework shape on the fracture strength of ımplant-supported all-ceramic fixed partial dentures in the molar region. J Prosthod 2008; 17: 274–85.
• 14. Klineberg IJ, Trulsson M, Murray GM. Occlusion on implants - is there a problem? J Oral Rehabil 2012; 39: 522-37.
• 15. Lin CL, Wang JC, Nonlinear finite element analysis of a splinted implant with various connectors and occlusal forces, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003; 18: 331–40.
• 16. Schillingburg HT, Hobo S, Whitsett LD, Jacobi R, Brackett SE. Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics. 3rd ed. Chicago Quintessence 1997; 89-90.
• 17. Rokni S, Todescan R, Watson P, Pharoah M, Adegbembo AO, Deporter D. An assessment of crown-to-root ratios with short sintered poroussurfaced implants supporting prostheses in partially edentulous patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Imp 2005; 20: 69-76.
• 18. Kwan N, Yang S, Guillaume D, Aboyoussef H, Ganz SD, Weiner S. Resistance to crown displacement on a hexagonal implant abutment. Imp Dent 2004; 13: 112-9.
• 19. Fugazzotto PA, Beagle JR, GaneleS J, Jaffin R, Vlassis J, Kumar A. Success and failure rates of 9 mm or shorter implants in the replacement of missing maxillary molars when restored with individual crowns: prelimary results 0 to 84 months in function: a retrospective study. J Periodontol 2004; 75: 327-32.
• 20. Grossmann Y, Sadan A. The prosthodontic concept of crown-to-root ratio: A review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2005; 93: 559-62. 21. Schulte J, Flores AM, Weed M. Crown-to-implant ratios of single tooth implant supported restorations J Prosthet Dent 2007; 98: 1-5.
• 22. Tawill G, Younan R. Clinical evaluation of short, machined-surface implants followed for 12 to 92 months. Int J Oral Maxillofac Imp 2006; 18: 894-901.
• 23. Dantas De Moraes SL, Verri FL, Santiago Junior JF, Augusto De Faria AD, Cantieri De Mello C, Pellizzer FPA. 3-D Finite Element Study of the Influence of Crown-Implant Ratio on Stress Distribition. Brazilian Dent J 2013; 24: 635-41.
• 24. Nissan J, Ghelfan O, Gross O, Priel I, Gross M, Chausbu G. The effect of crown/implant ratio and crown height space on stress distribution in unsplinted implant supporting restorations. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011; 69: 1934-9.
• 25. Nissan J, Ghelfan O, Gross O, Priel I, Gross M, Chausbu G. The effect of splinting implant-supported restorations on stress distribution of different crown-implant ratios and crown height spaces. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2011; 69: 2990-4.
• 26. Urdaneta RA, Rodriguez S, Mcneil DC, Weed M, Chuang SK. The effect of increased crown-to-implant ratio on single-tooth locking-taper implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Imp 2010; 25: 729-43.
• 27. Blanes RJ. To what extent does the crown–implant ratio affect the survival and complications of implant-supported reconstructions? A systematic review. Clin. Oral Impl Res 2009; 20: 67-72.
• 28. Birdi H, Schulte J, Kovacs A, Weed M, Chuang SK. Crown-to-implant ratios of short-length implants, J. Oral Imp. 2010; 6: 425-33.
• 29. Sotto-Maior BS, Senna PM, José DSW, Rocha EP, Cury AA. Influence of crown-to-implant ratio, retention system, restorative material, and occlusal loading on stress concentrations in single short implants, Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012; 27: 13-8.
• 30. Sutpideler M, Eckert SE, Zobitz M, An KN. Finite element analysis of effect of prosthesis height, angle of force application, and implant offset on supporting bone. Int J Oral Maxillofac Imp 2004; 19: 819-25.
• 31. Schneider D, Witt L, Hammerle CHF. Influence of the crown-to-implant length ratio on the clinical performance of implants supporting single crown restorations: a cross-sectional retrospective 5-year investigation. Clin. Oral Impl Res 2012; 23: 169-74.
• 32. Verri FR, Batista VE, Santiago JRJF, Almeida DA,Pellizzer EP. Effect of crown-to-implant ratio on peri-implant stress: A finite element analysis. Mater Sci Engineering 2014; 45: 234-40.
• 33. Lee KJ, Kim YG, Park JW, Lee JM, Suh JY. İnfluence of crown-to-implant ratio on periimplant marginal bone loss in the posterior region: a five-year retrospective study. J Periodont Imp Sci 2012; 42: 231-6.
• 34. Tawill G, Aboujaoude N, Younan R. Influence of prosthetic parameters on the survival and complication rates of short implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Imp 2006; 21: 275-82.