98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: The aim of this study is to investigate, through finite element analysis (FEA), the biomechanical behavior of the built-in angle corrected dental implant versus implant with angled multiunit abutment used in All-On-Four treatment protocol.
Methods: Two (3D) finite element models of a simplified edentulous mandible were constructed with two different posterior implant designs based on the All-On-Four protocol. Four implants were placed in each model, the two anterior implants were positioned vertically at the lateral incisor/canine sites. Depending on the implant fixture design in posterior area, there are two models created; Model I; the mandible was rehabilitated with four co-axis (4 mm in diameter × 15 mm in length) implants with distally built-in angle corrected implants (24-degree angle correction) .While Model II, the mandible was rehabilitated with four conventional (4 mm in diameter × 14 mm in length) implants with a distally inclined posterior implants (25 degree) and angled multiunit abutments. CAD software (Solidworks© 2017; Dassault Systems Solidworks Corp) was used to model the desired geometry. Axial and inclined Loads were applied on the two models. A Finite element analysis study was done using an efficient software ANSYS© with specified materials. The resultant equivalent Von-Misses stresses (VMS), maximum principal stresses and deformation analysis were calculated for each part (implants and prosthetic components).
Results: When applying axial and non-axial forces, model II (angled multiunit model) showed higher deformation on the level of Ti mesh about 13.286 μm and higher VMS 246.68 MPa than model I (angle corrected implant). Model I exhibited higher maximum stresses 107.83 MPa than Model II 94.988 MPa but the difference was not statistically significant.
Conclusion: Within the limitation of the FEA study, although angle correcting implant design is showing higher values in maximum principle stresses compared with angled multiunit abutments, model deformation and resultant VMS increased with angled multiunit abutments. The angle correcting designs at implant level have more promising results in terms of deformation and VMS distribution than angle correction at abutment level.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10938696 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-024-04091-2 | DOI Listing |
Int J Dent
June 2025
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Türkiye.
The aim of this research is to determine the effects of the variations in the implant angulation and the selection of abutment type on the mechanical potential of prosthetic components and to compare the deformations of abutment screws through micro-CT analysis. Forty titanium implants, each measuring 4.1 mm in diameter and 12 mm in length, were positioned in acrylic resin models in both straight and angled positions.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBMC Oral Health
April 2025
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Champollion St., Azarita, Alexandria, 21527, Egypt.
Background: To guarantee a passive fit, full arch implant supported prostheses require scrupulous impressions. The accuracy of conventional and digital impressions is still up for debate, despite several studies comparing both acquisition techniques. The present study aimed to compare mandibular full arch implant impressions by assessing the vertical misfit of implant supported frameworks obtained through conventional and digital impressions.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPurpose: To verify whether measuring the implant stability quotient (ISQ) at the abutment level is identical to the value obtained at the implant level.
Materials And Methods: A retrospective clinical study and in vitro study were performed. For each study, the ISQ measured at the implant level defined the control groups.
J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg
September 2025
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Yildiz Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Introduction: The "All-on-four" technique addresses this by placing two vertical implants in the anterior region and two posterior implants angled up to 45°. This study evaluates stress distribution on bone, implants, abutments, gingiva, and prostheses based on posterior implant angulation, using both standard and angled neck implants. Additionally, angled neck implants were used alongside standard implants.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Prosthet Dent
January 2025
Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea. Electronic address:
Statement Of Problem: The effects of nonaxial forces on peri-implant bone loss have been investigated, mostly in reference to buccal mesiodistal implant angulations as potential risk indicators. However, when implant angulations are multidirectional, including the buccolingual aspect, evaluations of peri-implant bone loss based solely on mesiodistal measurements may skew the correlation.
Purpose: The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the correlation between the magnitudes of multidirectional implant angulations and peri-implant crestal bone loss.