The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of overdenture attachment systems with different working principles on stress transmission: A three-dimensional finite element study

  • Received : 2020.04.30
  • Accepted : 2020.09.03
  • Published : 2020.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

PURPOSE. The aim of the present study was to compare the stress distributions on the dental implants, abutments, and bone caused by different overdenture attachment types under functional chewing forces. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The 3D finite element models of the mandible, dental implants, attachment types, and prostheses were prepared. In accordance with a conventional dental implant supported overdenture design, the dental implants were positioned at the bone level in the canine teeth region bilaterally. A total of eight models using eight different attachment systems were used in this study. All the models were loaded to simulate chewing forces generated during the centric relationship (450 N), lateral movement (400 N), protrusive movement (400 N), and also in the presence of a food mass unilaterally (200 N). Stress outputs were obtained as the maximum principal stress and the equivalent von-Mises stress. RESULTS. In all attachment types, higher stress values were observed in the abutments, dental implants, and bone in the magnet attachments in different loading conditions. The highest stress values were observed among the magnet systems in the components of the Titanmagnetics model in all loading conditions (stresses were 15.4, 17.7, and 33.1 MPa on abutment, dental implant, and bone, respectively). The lowest stress value was observed in the models of Zest and O-Ring attachments. CONCLUSION. The results of the present study implied that attachment types permitting rotation and tolerating various angles created lower stresses on the bone, dental implants, and abutments.

Keywords

References

  1. Zhang L, Lyu C, Shang Z, Niu A, Liang X. Quality of life of implant-supported overdenture and conventional complete denture in restoring the edentulous mandible: A systematic review. Implant Dent 2017;26:945-50. https://doi.org/10.1097/id.0000000000000668
  2. Thomason JM, Kelly SA, Bendkowski A, Ellis JS. Two implant retained overdentures-a review of the literature supporting the McGill and York consensus statements. J Dent 2012;40:22-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2011.08.017
  3. Karayazgan-Saracoglu B, Atay A, Korkmaz C, Gunay Y. Quality of life assessment of implant-retained overdentures and fixed metal-acrylic resin prostheses in patients with marginal mandibulectomy. J Prosthet Dent 2017;118:551-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2017.01.025
  4. Schimmel M, Muller F, Suter V, Buser D. Implants for elderly patients. Periodontol 2000 2017;73:228-40. https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12166
  5. Ying Z, Gonda T, Maeda Y. Influence of attachment height and shape on lateral force transmission in implant overdenture treatment. Int J Prosthodont 2017;30:586-91. https://doi.org/10.11607/ijp.5400
  6. Porter JA Jr, Petropoulos VC, Brunski JB. Comparison of load distribution for implant overdenture attachments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:651-62.
  7. Manju V, Sreelal T. Mandibular implant-supported overdenture: an in vitro comparison of ball, bar, and magnetic attachments. J Oral Implantol 2013;39:302-7. https://doi.org/10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-11-00050
  8. Leao RS, Moraes SLD, Vasconcelos BCE, Lemos CAA, Pellizzer EP. Splinted and unsplinted overdenture attachment systems: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Oral Rehabil 2018;45:647-56. https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.12651
  9. Takahashi T, Gonda T, Tomita A, Maeda Y. Effect of attachment type on implant strain in maxillary implant overdentures: Comparison of ball, locator, and magnet attachments. Part 2: Palateless dentures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2018;33:357-64. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.6157
  10. Unsal GS, Erbasar GNH, Aykent F, Ozyilmaz OY, Ozdogan MS. Evaluation of stress distribution on mandibular implant-supported overdentures with different bone heights and attachment types: A 3D finite element analysis. J Oral Implantol 2019;45:363-70. https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-19-00076
  11. 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 2008;30:218-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2007.02.005
  12. Baker, EW, Schunke, M, Schulte, E, Schumacher, U. Anatomy for dental medicine. 2nd ed. New York; Thieme; 2015. p. 40-3.
  13. Larheim TA, Svanaes DB. Reproducibility of rotational panoramic radiography: mandibular linear dimensions and angles. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1986;90:45-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(86)90026-0
  14. Brunski JB, Puleo DA, Nanci A. Biomaterials and biomechanics of oral and maxillofacial implants: current status and future developments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:15-46.
  15. Cheng T, Sun G, Huo J, He X, Wang Y, Ren YF. Patient satisfaction and masticatory efficiency of single implant-retained mandibular overdentures using the stud and magnetic attachments. J Dent 2012;40:1018-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2012.08.011
  16. Chun HJ, Park DN, Han CH, Heo SJ, Heo MS, Koak JY. Stress distributions in maxillary bone surrounding overdenture implants with different overdenture attachments. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32:193-205. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2004.01407.x
  17. Mitrani R, Brudvik JS, Phillips KM. Posterior implants for distal extension removable prostheses: a retrospective study. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2003;23:353-9.
  18. Silva GC, Mendonca JA, Lopes LR, Landre J Jr. Stress patterns on implants in prostheses supported by four or six implants: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2010;25:239-46.
  19. Rand A, Stiesch M, Eisenburger M, Greuling A. The effect of direct and indirect force transmission on peri-implant bone stress - a contact finite element analysis. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 2017;20:1132-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/10255842.2017.1338691
  20. Tillitson EW, Craig RG, Peyton FA. Friction and wear of restorative dental materials. J Dent Res 1971;50:149-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345710500011001
  21. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2012.11.008
  22. Turker N, Buyukkaplan US, Sadowsky SJ, Ozarslan MM. Finite element stress analysis of applied forces to implants and supporting tissues using the "All-on-Four" concept with different occlusal schemes. J Prosthodont 2019;28:185-94.
  23. Trivedi S. Finite element analysis: A boon to dentistry. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res 2014;4:200-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobcr.2014.11.008
  24. Dashti MH, Atashrazm P, Emadi MI, Mishaeel S, Banava S. The effects of two attachment types on the stresses introduced to the mandibular residual ridge: a 3D finite element analysis. Quintessence Int 2013;44:585-90. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.qi.a29753
  25. Ellis JS, Burawi G, Walls A, Thomason JM. Patient satisfaction with two designs of implant supported removable overdentures; ball attachment and magnets. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:1293-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2009.01810.x
  26. Eser A, Akca K, Eckert S, Cehreli MC. Nonlinear finite element analysis versus ex vivo strain gauge measurements on immediately loaded implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:439-46.
  27. Iplikcioglu H, Akca K, Cehreli MC, Sahin S. Comparison of non-linear finite element stress analysis with in vitro strain gauge measurements on a Morse taper implant. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18:258-65.
  28. Amer MM, Rashad HA, Abdallah S. Stress distribution of implant retained obturators using different types of attachments: A three dimensional finite element analysis. Tanta Dent J 2015;12:30-40.
  29. Kim HY, Lee JY, Shin SW, Bryant SR. Attachment systems for mandibular implant overdentures: a systematic review. J Adv Prosthodont 2012;4:197-203. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2012.4.4.197
  30. Menicucci G, Ceruti P, Barabino E, Screti A, Bignardi C, Preti G. A preliminary in vivo trial of load transfer in mandibular implant-retained overdentures anchored in 2 different ways: allowing and counteracting free rotation. Int J Prosthodont 2006;19:574-6.
  31. Oetterli M, Kiener P, Mericske-Stern R. A longitudinal study on mandibular implants supporting an overdenture: The influence of retention mechanism and anatomic-prosthetic variables on peri-implant parameters. Int J Prosthodont 200; 14:536-42.
  32. Wiemeyer AS, Agar JR, Kazemi RB. Orientation of retentive matrices on spherical attachments independent of implant parallelism. J Prosthet Dent 2001;86:434-7. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2001.118365
  33. El-Anwar MI, El-Taftazany EA, Hamed HA, ElHay MAA. Influence of number of implants and attachment type on stress distribution in mandibular implant-retained overdentures: Finite element analysis. Open Access Maced J Med Sci 2017;5:244-9. https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2017.047
  34. Cakarer S, Can T, Yaltirik M, Keskin C. Complications associated with the ball, bar and Locator attachments for implantsupported overdentures. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2011; 16:e953-9.
  35. Vafaei F, Khoshhal M, Bayat-Movahed S, Ahangary AH, Firooz F, Izady A, Rakhshan V. Comparative stress distribution of implant-retained mandibular ball-supported and barsupported overlay dentures: a finite element analysis. J Oral Implantol 2011;37:421-9. https://doi.org/10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-10-00057
  36. Natali AN. Dental biomechanics. 1st ed. New York, CRC Press; 2003. p. 74-8.
  37. Sakaguchi RL. Craig's restorative dental materials. 12nd ed. Houston, Elsevier Health Sciences; 2006. p. 93-101.
  38. Ozan O, Ramoglu S. Effect of implant height differences on different attachment types and peri-implant bone in mandibular two-implant overdentures: 3D finite element study. J Oral Implantol 2015;41:e50-9. https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-13-00239
  39. Goodacre CJ, Bernal G, Rungcharassaeng K, Kan JY. Clinical complications with implants and implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent 2003;90:121-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(03)00212-9
  40. Binon PP. Implants and components: entering the new millennium. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:76-94.
  41. Scherer MD, McGlumphy EA, Seghi RR, Campagni WV. Comparison of retention and stability of implant-retained overdentures based upon implant number and distribution. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013;28:1619-28. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3067
  42. Goncalves F, Campestrini VLL, Rigo-Rodrigues MA, Zanardi PR. Effect of the attachment system on the biomechanical and clinical performance of overdentures: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent 2020;123:589-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.03.024
  43. de Souza Batista VE, Vechiato-Filho AJ, Santiago JF Jr, Sonego MV, Verri FR, Dos Santos DM, Goiato MC, Pellizzer EP. Clinical viability of single implant-retained mandibular overdentures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2018;47:1166-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijom.2018.01.021

Cited by

  1. Evaluation of a Series of Overdentures Made in a Higher Education Dental Institution in Southern Brazil vol.22, pp.7, 2020, https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3149