THREE-DIMENSIONAL FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF REZECTION OBTURATORS IN PREMAXILLA AND UNILATERAL MAXILLARY DEFECTS

Öz

Purpose: The objective of this study is to analyze comperatively the properties of functional load and stres distribution by using Aramany Class IV obturator protheses with/without zygomatic implants. Material and Methods: A 3-D solid model of an Aramany Class IV maxillary resection case and it’s prosthesis was constructed. 150 N vertical force was loaded by first molar teeth. Simulated occlusal loading was applied on three different points. First loading was applied to the defected side, second was applied to the contralateral side and third one was applied to both. Qualitative analysis was based on the scale of maximum and minimum principle stress in the bone were investigated in Algor(Fempro, USA) programme Results: Maximum and minimum principal stresses in bone under different loading were illustrated with figures and color scales. Obtained numerical datas was represented in graphics. Conclusion: Placing a zygomatic implant to the defected area decreased the stresses occured in the bone. Zygomatic implant is an alternative treatment option for Aramany class IV obturator protheses

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Zygomatic implant, obturator prostheses, Aramany IV, finite element analysis

PREMAKSİLLA İLE TEK TARAFLI MAKSİLLER DEFEKTLİ REZEKSİYON OBTURATÖRLERİNİN ÜÇ BOYUTLU SONLU ELEMANLAR STRES ANALİZ YÖNTEMİYLE DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı; Aramany sınıf IV maksiller defektlerde zigomatik implant kullanılarak yapılmış obturatör protezlerin biyomekanik özelliklerini, zigomatik implant içermeyen obturatör protezlerin işlevsel yük dağılım değerlerini analiz etmektir.

Gereç ve yöntem: Maksiller rezeksiyon yapılmış Aramany sınıf IV obturatör protezin ve rezeksiyon yapılan bölgenin üç boyutlu katı modeli elde edildi. Oluşturulan modellere 150 N kuvvet protezin birinci molar diş hizasından oklüzyon düzlemine vertikal olarak uygulandı. İlk yükleme defektin bulunduğu taraftan, ikincisi sağlam kemiğin bulunduğu bölgeden, üçüncü yükleme ise her iki taraftan uygulandı. Kantitatif analizlere dayanan sıkışma ve gerilme değerleri Algor (Fempro, USA) programında incelendi.

Bulgular: Kuvvetlerin kemikte oluşturduğu stresler şekiller ve renk skalaları ile gösterildi. Elde edilen sayısal veriler ise grafiklerle belirtildi.

Sonuç: Zigomatik implant uygulamasının kemiğe iletilen kuvvetleri azalttığı ve Aramany sınıf IV obturatör protezlerde zigomatik implant kullanımının alternatif bir tedavi seçeneği olduğu görüldü.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Zigomatik implant, obturatör protez, Aramany IV, sonlu elemanlar analizi

Kaynakça

1. Adisman IK. Prosthesis serviceability for acquir jaw defects. Dent Clin North Am 1990; 34:265- 83.
2. Özdemir H, Aladağ Lİ. Sonradan kazanılmış bir maksiller defektin protetik obturasyonu: Bir olgu sunumu. Atatürk Ünv Diş. Hek Fak Derg 2011; 4: 122-7.
3. Buzayan MM, Ariffin YT, Yunus N. Closed hollow bulb obturatör- One step fabrication: A clinical report. Journal of prosthodontics. 2013; 1-5
4. Korkmaz FM. Maksiller defektlerde kuvvet dağılımının uygulanan implantların tip ve lokalizasyonlarına göre sonlu elemanlar analizi yöntemiyle değerlendirilmesi. Doktora Tezi. Ankara: Gazi Üniversitesi; 2008
5. Yaluğ S,Nalbant L. Bir bukkal uzantılı obtüratör yapımı. Cumhuriyet Ünv Diş Hek Fak Derg 1998; 1: 78-8.
6. Meenakshi A,Shah D. The obturator prostheses for maxillectomy. SRM Journal of Research in Dental Sciences 2012; 3: 3.
7. Cordeiro PG, Santamaria E. A classiŞcation system and algorithm for reconstruction on maxillectomy and midfacial defects. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000;105: 2331–46.
8. Brown JS, Rogers SN, McNally DN, Boyle M. A modiŞed classiŞcation for the maxillectomy defect. Head Neck 2000; 22–6

9. Okay DJ, Genden E, Buchbinder D, Urken M. guidelines reconstruction of the maxilla: a classiŞcation system of defects J Prosthet Dent 2001; 86: 352–63 for surgical
10. Aramany MA. Basic principles of obturator design for partially edentulous patients. Part I: classification. J Prosthet Dent 1978; 40: 554-557.
11. Aramany MA. Basic principles of obturator design for partially edentulous patients. Part II: design principles. J Prosthet Dent 1978; 40: 656-62.
12. Keskin H, Özdemir T. Çene Yüz Protezleri, İstanbul: İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları; 1995.
13. Yamamoto Y, Kawashima K, Sugihara T, et al. Surgical management of maxillectomy defects based on the concept of buttress reconstruction. Head Neck 2004; 26: 247–56.
14. Chun HJ, Park DN, Han CH, Heo SJ, Heo MS, Koak JY. Stress distrubituons in maxillary bone surroundings overdenture implants with different overdenture attachments. J Oral Rehabil 2005; 32: 193-205.
15. Daas M, Dubois G, Bonnet AS, Lipinski P, Rignon- Bret C. A complete finite element model of a mandibular implant- retained overdenture with two implants: Comparison between rigid and resilient attachment configurations. Med Eng Phys 2007;3:23.
16. Miyashita ER, Mattos BSC,Noritomi PY, Navarro H. Finite element analsis of maxillary bone stres caused by Aramany class IV obturator protheses. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 2012; 107:336-42
17. Wang M,Qu X, Cao M, Wang D, Zhnag C. Biomechanical three- dimensional finite element analysis of protheses retained with or without zygoma implants in maxillectomy patients. Journal of Biomechanics 2013;46:1155-61.
18. Korkmaz FM, Korkmaz YT, Yaluğ S, Korkmaz T. Impact of dental and zygomatic Implants on stres distribution in maxillary defects: A 3 dimensional finite element analysis study. Journal of Oral Implantology 2012;5:557-67
19. Futran N.D., Mendez E. Developments in recostruction of midface and maxilla. Lancet Oncology . 2006; 7, 249-58
20. Sun J, Shen Y, Li J, Zhang Z.Y. Reconstruction of high maxillectomy defects with the fibula osteomyocutaneous flap in combination with titanium mesh or a zygomatic implant. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 127: 150-60.
21. Bedrossian E, Stumpel III L, Beckely M, Indersano T. The zygomatic implant: preliminary data on treatment of severely resorbed maxillae. A clinical report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17: 861-5.
22. Malavez C, Abarca M, Durdu F, Daelemans P. Clinical outcome of 103 consecutive zygomatic implants: a 6-48 months follow-up study. Clin Oral İmplants Res 2004; 15:18-22
23. Kreissl ME, Heydecke G, Metzger MC, Schoen R. Zygoma implant- supported prosthetic rehabilitation after partial maxillectomy using surgical navigation: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2007; 97: 121-8.
24. 2Uchida Y, Goto M, Katsuki T, Akiyoshi T. Measurement of the maxilla and zygoma as an aid in installingzygomatic implants. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001;59: 1193-8.
25. Ishak M.I, Abdulkadir M, Sulaiman E, Kassim N. Effects of different zygomatic implant body surface roughness and implant length on stres distribution. Biomedical Engineering and Sciences  2010; 1: 210-5.
26. Fredman M, Ring M, Stassen L.F.A. Effect of alveolar bone support on zygomatic implants: a finite element analysis study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2013; 42: 671-6.
27. Magne P. Efficient 3D finite element analysis of dental restorative procedures using micro-CT data. Dental materials 2007; 23: 539–48.
28. İnan Ö,Sevimay M,Eraslan O, Eskitaşcıoğlu G. Comparison of Finite Element and Photoelastic Stress Analysis Methods. Turkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci 2009;15:93-101.
29. Eraslan O, İnan Ö, Eskitaşçıoğlu G. The Effect of Artificial Tooth Materials on Stress Distribution in Complete Dentures. Turkiye Klinikleri J Dental Sci 2009;15:81-6.
30. Gül EB. Farklı açılarda yerleştirilen implantlarla
31. desteklenen barlı tutucularda kemikteki gerilme
32. dayanımının incelenmesi. Doktora tezi. Ankara:
33. Gazi Üniversitesi; 2009.