Influence of a Novel Spherical Connection Interface for Angled Abutments in Cantilever-Extended All-on-Four Bar Prostheses on Stress Distribution

Abstract

In this study, the biomechanical performance of a newly developed spherical connection interface design for angled abutment systems used in all-on-four implant-supported bar-retained overdenture prostheses in completely edentulous patients was investigated. It is well known that bending moments generated in cantilever-extended prostheses lead to high stress concentrations in the implant, abutment, and surrounding bone tissue. In order to mitigate these adverse effects, novel abutment designs featuring a spherical connection surface were developed as an alternative to conventional 15° and 30° angled abutment models, and were evaluated in combination with two different bar cross-sections (I and UCG). The three-dimensional mandibular model was generated based on CT data, and the mechanical behavior of the prosthesis-implant-bone assembly was analyzed using the finite element method in the ANSYS Workbench environment. The models were assumed to be homogeneous, isotropic, and linearly elastic, and a 100 N occlusal load was applied in a 45° oblique direction. The results obtained according to the von Mises criterion demonstrated that the spherical connection designs provided a significant reduction in stress, particularly in the posterior region, compared with conventional models. In the I-section spherical model with 15° angulation, stress reduction of up to 23.2% was observed in the cortical bone surrounding the posterior implant, whereas the spherical models with UCG section demonstrated an improvement ranging between 24 - 27% in the posterior implant body. The findings indicate that the spherical interface design has the potential to reduce biomechanical risks associated with the cantilever effect and to enhance the service life of implant and superstructure components. This approach offers an innovative and clinically applicable solution for preventing complications related to the use of angled abutments.

Keywords

• Angled abutment
• Spherical connection
• Finite element analysis
• Cantilever prosthesis
• Bar-retained overdenture
• Dental implant

Supporting Institution

Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit of Iğdır University

Project Number

MUF0422Y14

Ethical Statement

No experiments on humans or animals were conducted in this study. Therefore, ethical committee approval was not required.

Thanks

This study was supported by the Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit of Iğdır University under Project No. MUF0422Y14

Kantilever Uzantılı All-on-Four Bar Protezlerde Açılı Abutmentlar için Geliştirilen Küresel Bağlantı Arayüzeyinin Gerilme Dağılımına Etkisi

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, tam dişsiz hastalarda uygulanan all-on-four implant destekli bar tutuculu overdenture protezlerde kullanılan açılı abutment sistemleri için geliştirilen yeni nesil küresel bağlantı arayüzey tasarımının biyomekanik performansı incelenmiştir. Kantilever uzantılı protezlerde oluşan eğilme momentlerinin implant, abutment ve implantı çevreleyen kemik dokusunda yüksek gerilmelere yol açtığı bilinmektedir. Bu olumsuz etkileri azaltmak amacıyla 15° ve 30° açılı klasik abutment modellerine alternatif olarak küresel formda bağlantı yüzeyine sahip özgün abutment tasarımları geliştirilmiş ve iki farklı bar kesiti (I ve UCG) ile birlikte değerlendirilmiştir. Alt çeneye ait üç boyutlu model, BT verilerinden yararlanılarak oluşturulmuş; protez-implant-kemik bileşenlerinin mekanik davranışı ANSYS Workbench ortamında sonlu elemanlar analizi yöntemiyle incelenmiştir. Modeller homojen, izotropik ve doğrusal elastik kabul edilmiş; 45° oblik yönde 100 N oklüzal yük uygulanmıştır. Von Mises kriterine göre elde edilen sonuçlar, küresel bağlantılı tasarımların klasik modellere kıyasla özellikle posterior bölgede belirgin gerilme azalması sağladığını göstermiştir. I kesitli ve 15° açılı küresel modelde posterior implant çevresindeki kortikal kemikte %23,2’ye varan iyileşme etkisi olurken, UCG kesitli küresel modellerin posterior implant gövdesinde ise %24-27 aralığında iyileşme olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular, küresel arayüzey tasarımının kantilever etkisinden kaynaklanan biyomekanik riskleri azaltarak implant ve üst yapı bileşenlerinin servis ömrünü artırma potansiyeline sahip olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Bu yaklaşım, açılı abutment kullanımına bağlı komplikasyonların önlenmesinde yenilikçi ve uygulanabilir bir çözüm sunmaktadır.

Keywords

• Açılı abutment
• Küresel bağlantı
• Sonlu elemanlar analizi
• Kantilever protez
• Bar tutuculu overdenture
• Dental implant

Supporting Institution

Iğdır Üniversitesi BAP

Project Number

MUF0422Y14

Ethical Statement

Bu çalışmada insan veya hayvanlar üzerinde herhangi bir deney yapılmamıştır. Bu nedenle etik kurul izni gerekmemektedir.

Thanks

Desteklerinden dolayı Iğdır Üniversitesi BAP birimine teşşekürlerimi sunarım.

References

1. Abdeen, R. M., Elsyad, M. A., & Kortam, S. A. (2025). Occlusal contact area, occlusal forces, and marginal bone loss around implants supporting overdentures and fixed implant-supported prostheses in patients with an atrophied mandible: A 1-year randomized clinical trial. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 134(6), 2320-2327.
2. Adam, N. M., Attia, O. H., Al-Sulttani, A. O., Mahmood, H. A., As’arry, A., & Rezali, K. A. M. (2020). Numerical analysis for solar panel subjected with an external force to overcome adhesive force in desert areas. CFD Letters, 12(9), 60-75.
3. Akgün, G. & Kayacan, R. (2023). Abutment-Bar Structure Connection Geometry: An Important Design Parameter for Implant-Supported Bar-Retained Overdentures With Cantilever Extension. Journal of Oral Implantology, 49(3), 330–339.
4. Almutairi, M., Byun, S., Chee, W., & Park, C. (2024). Conversion of a failing fixed implant prosthesis into an implant-retained overdenture: A clinical report. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 134(6), 2053-2057
5. Al-Matrafi, T., Ahmed, K., Basunbul, G., Ismail, M., & Melaibari, A. (2025). Enhanced implant longevity: Finite element optimization of all-on-four implant designs to minimize jawbone stresses. The Saudi Dental Journal, 37(10), 90.
6. Ausiello, P., Tribst, J. P. M., Ventre, M., Salvati, E., Di Lauro, A. E., Martorelli, M., ... & Watts, D. C. (2021). The role of cortical zone level and prosthetic platform angle in dental implant mechanical response: A 3D finite element analysis. Dental Materials, 37(11), 1688-1697.
7. Baki, N., Avcu, G. Y., & Tuzlali, M. (2025). Biomechanical evaluation of three full-arch immediate loading protocols in the mandible via finite element analysis: All-on-4, Trefoil, and Five-implant design. BMC Oral Health, 25, 1995.
8. Bekhit, S. S., Abdelhamid, A. M., & Metwally, N. A. (2025). Evaluation of prosthetic screw loosening in all-on-four implant-supported restorations with two different connection systems. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 133(4), 1070-1077.

9. Burkhart, T. A., Andrews, D. M., & Dunning, C. E. (2013). Finite element modeling mesh quality, energy balance and validation methods: A review with recommendations associated with the modeling of bone tissue. Journal of biomechanics, 46(9), 1477-1488.
10. Cantó-Navés, O., Istwany, K., Medina-Gálvez, R., Figueras-Alvarez, O. (2025). A digital protocol to fabricate a maxillary bar-retained implant overdenture from a complete prosthesis using a reverse impression technique. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
11. Chen, K. W., Lin, T. M., Liu, P. R., Ramp, L. C., Lin, H. J., Wu, C. T., & Pan, Y. H. (2013). An analysis of the implant‐supported overdenture in the edentulous mandible. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 40(1), 43-50.
12. Chen, X., Xu, Z., Gai, K., Pei, X., Li, R., & Wan, Q. (2025). Biomechanical analysis of All-on-4 implant supported framework using different materials across various clinical practice. BMC Oral Health, 25(1), 1-10.
13. Dayrell, A. C., de Araújo, C. T. P., Rocha, R. L., Isolan, C. P., Noritomi, P. Y., & Mesquita, M. F. (2022). Biomechanics of internal connection in mandibular implant-supported prosthesis under effect of loadings and number of implants: a 3D finite element analysis. Computers in biology and medicine, 148, 105755.
14. de Melo Jr, E. J. M., & Francischone, C. E. (2020). Three-dimensional finite element analysis of two angled narrow-diameter implant designs for an all-on-4 prosthesis. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 124(4), 477-484.
15. Elsyad, M. A., & Khairallah, A. S. (2017). Chewing efficiency and maximum bite force with different attachment systems of implant overdentures: a crossover study. Clinical Oral Implants Research, 28(6), 677-682.
16. Erdoğdu, M., Demirel, M. G., Mohammadi, R., Güntekin, N., & Ghanbarzadeh Chaleshtori, M. (2024). Influence of Framework Material and Abutment Configuration on Fatigue Performance in Dental Implant Systems: A Finite Element Analysis. Medicina, 60(9), 1463.
17. Falcinelli, C., Valente, F., Vasta, M., & Traini, T. (2023). Finite element analysis in implant dentistry: State of the art and future directions. Dental Materials, 39(6), 539-556.
18. Hong, M. H., & Choi, H. (2024). Three-dimensional finite element analysis of stress distribution in dental implant prosthesis and surrounding bone using PEEK abutments. Biomimetics, 9(8), 472.
19. Hu, F., Gong, Y., Bian, Z., Zhang, X., Xu, B., Zhang, J., ... & Song, L. (2019). Comparison of Three Different Types of Two‐Implant‐Supported Magnetic Attachments on the Stress Distribution in Edentulous Mandible. Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2019(1), 6839517.
20. Huang, H. L., Lin, T. W., Tsai, H. L., Wu, Y. L., & Wu, A. Y. J. (2022). Biomechanical effects of bone atrophy, implant design, and vertical or tilted of posterior implant on all-on-four concept implantation: finite element analysis. Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering, 42(4), 488-497.
21. Ibrahim, C. R. M., Sameh, A., & Askar, O. (2024). A finite element analysis study on different angle correction designs for inclined implants in All-On-Four protocol. BMC Oral Health, 24(1), 331.
22. Kasari, M. S., Yousefi, H., Shirazi, A. E., & Geramy, A. (2023). Effect of bone quality and osseointegration on stress distribution in the bone tissue surrounding dental implant. A finite element analysis. Journal of Osseointegration, 15(2), 106-112.
23. Kayacan, R., Ballarini, R., Mullen, R. L. (1997). Theoretical study of the effects of tooth and implant mobility differences on occlusal force transmission in tooth/implant-supported partial prostheses. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 78(4), 391-399.
24. Krennmair, S., Malek, M., Stehrer, R., Stähler, P., Otto, S., & Postl, L. (2023). The effect of frontal trauma on the edentulous mandible with four different interforaminal implant-prosthodontic anchoring configurations. A 3D finite element analysis. European Journal of Medical Research, 28(1), 608.
25. Kupprano, P., Kamonkhantikul, K., Homsiang, W., Takahashi, H., & Arksornnukit, M. (2024). Finite element analysis on implant-supported bar with different geometric shapes. BMC Oral Health, 24(1), 1572.
26. Misch, C. E. (2006). Consideration of biomechanical stress in treatment with dental implants. Dentistry Today, 25(5), 80-82.
27. Naguib, G. H., Abougazia, A. O., Al-Turki, L. E., Mously, H. A., Hashem, A. B. H., Mira, A. I., ... & Hamed, M. T. (2024). A New Multi-Axial Functional Stress Analysis Assessing the Longevity of a Ti-6Al-4V Dental Implant Abutment Screw. Biomimetics, 9(11), 689.
28. Ozan, O., & Kurtulmus-Yilmaz, S. (2018). Biomechanical Comparison of Different Implant Inclinations and Cantilever Lengths in All-on-4 Treatment Concept by Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis. International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants, 33(1).
29. Rittel, D., Dorogoy, A., & Shemtov‐Yona, K. (2018). Modeling the effect of osseointegration on dental implant pullout and torque removal tests. Clinical implant dentistry and related research, 20(5), 683-691.
30. Rubo, J. H., & Souza, E. A. C. (2008). Finite element analysis of stress in bone adjacent to dental implants. Journal of Oral Implantology, 34(5), 248-255.
31. Sadowsky, S. J. (2019). Occlusal overload with dental implants: a review. International journal of implant dentistry, 5(1), 29.
32. Schimmel, M., Memedi, K., Parga, T., Katsoulis, J., & Mueller, F. (2017). Masticatory Performance and Maximum Bite and Lip Force Depend on the Type of Prosthesis. International Journal of Prosthodontics, 30(6), 565-572
33. Schimmel, M., Janner, S. F., Joda, T., Wittneben, J. G., McKenna, G., & Brägger, U. (2021). Mandibular implant-supported fixed complete dental prostheses on implants with ultrashort and standard length: A pilot treatment. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry, 126(2), 137-143.
34. Szabó, Á. L., Nagy, Á. L., Lászlófy, C., Gajdács, M., Bencsik, P., Kárpáti, K., & Baráth, Z. (2022). Distally tilted implants according to the all-on-four® treatment concept for the rehabilitation of complete edentulism: a 3.5-year retrospective radiographic study of clinical outcomes and marginal bone level changes. Dentistry Journal, 10(5), 82.
35. Taruna, M., Chittaranjan, B., Sudheer, N., Tella, S., & Abusaad, M. D. (2014). Prosthodontic perspective to all-on-4® concept for dental implants. Journal of clinical and diagnostic research: JCDR, 8(10), ZE16.
36. Wu, A. Y. J., Hsu, J. T., Fuh, L. J., & Huang, H. L. (2020). Biomechanical effect of implant design on four implants supporting mandibular full-arch fixed dentures: In vitro test and finite element analysis. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association, 119(10), 1514-1523.
37. Zapata, J. M., Leal, E., Hunter, R., de Souza, R. F., & Borie, E. (2022). Biomechanical behavior of narrow dental implants made with aluminum-and vanadium-free alloys: a finite element analysis. Materials, 15(24), 8903.
38. Zhong, J., Guazzato, M., Chen, J., Zhang, Z., Sun, G., Huo, X., ... & Li, Q. (2020). Effect of different implant configurations on biomechanical behavior of full-arch implant-supported mandibular monolithic zirconia fixed prostheses. Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials, 102, 103490.