• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.18 no.4
• /
• pp.321-329
• /
• 2002

Bending moments results from offset overloading of dental implant, which may cause stress concentrations to exceed the physiological capacity of cortical bone and lead to various kinds of mechanical failures. The purpose of this study was to compare the distributing pattern of stress on the finite element models with the different angulated placement of dental implant in mandibular posterior missing areas. The three kinds of finite element model, were designed according to 3 main configurations: Model 1(parallel typed placement of 2 fixtures), Model 2(15. distal angulated placement of one fixture on second molar area), Model 3(15. mesial angulated placement of one fixture on second molar area). The cemented crowns for mandibular first and second molars were made on the two fixtures (4mm 11.5). Three-dimensional finite element models by two fixtures were constructed with the components of the implant and surrounding bone. A 200N vertical static load were applied to the center of central fossa and the point 2mm apart from the center of central fossa on each model. The preprocessing, solving and postprocessing procedures were done by using FEM analysis software NISA/DISPLAY IV Version 10.0((Engineering Mechanics Research Corporation, USA). Von Mises stresses were evaluated and compared in the supporting bone, fixtures, and abutment. The results were as following : (1) Under the point loading at the central fossa, the direction of angulated fixture affected the stress pattern of implants. (2) Under the offset loading, the position of loading affected more on the stress concentration of implants compare to the angulated direction of implants. The results had a tendency to increase the stress on the supporting bone, fixture and screw under the offset loads when the placement angulation of implant fixture is placed toward mesial or distal direction. In designing of the occlusal scheme for angulated placement, placing the occlusal contacts axially during chewing appears to have advantages in a biomechanical viewpoint.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.71-81
• /
• 2004

The purpose of this study was to compare the distributing pattern of stress on the finite element models of two units implant prosthesis with one angulated placement of two implant fixtures. The two unit implant crowns simulated to mandibular first and second molars were made. The two kinds of finite element models were designed according to angulation of fixture ($4.0mm{\times}11.5mm$) : Model 1($15^{\circ}$ buccally angulated placement of one fixture on second molar area), Model 2($15^{\circ}$ lingually angulated placement of one fixture on second molar area). Axial loads of 200N were applied to the center of central fossa and to distance of 2mm and 4mm apart from the center of central fossa. Von-Mises stresses were recorded and compared in the fixtures, and buccolingual section of implants. The results were as follows: 1. Under axial loading at the central fossa, the stress was distributed along the straight fixture except apical portion, while on buccally or lingually angulated placement, the highest stresses were concentrated in the neck portion on the opposite side of the angulated fixture. 2. With offset distance increasing, the stresses were concentrated greater in buccal neck of lingually angulated fixture than in lingual neck of buccally angulated fixture. From the above results, in designing of the occlusal scheme for implant prosthesis with the angulated fixture, occlusal contacts should be placed to distribute stress axially in maximum intercuspation and to avoid offset force during eccentric movements.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.47 no.4
• /
• pp.229-237
• /
• 2017

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the initial stability as insertion and removal torque and the clinical applicability of novel orthodontic zirconia micro-implants made using a powder injection molding (PIM) technique with those parameters in conventional titanium micro-implants. Methods: Sixty zirconia and 60 titanium micro-implants of similar design (diameter, 1.6 mm; length, 8.0 mm) were inserted perpendicularly in solid polyurethane foam with varying densities of 20 pounds per cubic foot (pcf), 30 pcf, and 40 pcf. Primary stability was measured as maximum insertion torque (MIT) and maximum removal torque (MRT). To investigate clinical applicability, compressive and tensile forces were recorded at 0.01, 0.02, and 0.03 mm displacement of the implants at angles of $0^{\circ}$, $10^{\circ}$, $20^{\circ}$, $30^{\circ}$, and $40^{\circ}$. The biocompatibility of zirconia micro-implants was assessed via an experimental animal study. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between zirconia micro-implants and titanium alloy implants with regard to MIT, MRT, or the amount of movement in the angulated lateral displacement test. As angulation increased, the mean compressive and tensile forces required to displace both types of micro-implants increased substantially at all distances. The average bone-to-implant contact ratio of prototype zirconia micro-implants was $56.88{\pm}6.72%$. Conclusions: Zirconia micro-implants showed initial stability and clinical applicability for diverse orthodontic treatments comparable to that of titanium micro-implants under compressive and tensile forces.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.33-37
• /
• 2020

PURPOSE. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effects of type of magnet attachment and implant angulation in two implant overdenture models. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Magnet attachments used in this study were flat and dome types (MGT5515, MGT5520D, Dentium Co., Seoul, Korea). Two implants with keepers were inserted in the resin blocks at a distance of 24 mm. For the first model, the implants were parallel to the vertical and perpendicular to the horizontal; for the second model, both were angulated 5 degrees to the mesial; for the third model, both were angulated 10 degrees toward the mesial. The retentive force was measured in both vertical and lateral directions. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software version 22.0 (α=.05). RESULTS. The flat type magnet attachment showed the highest lateral retentive force in the 20° divergent group (P<.05) and the dome type magnet attachment showed the highest lateral retentive force in the parallel group (P<.05). The vertical and lateral retentive force of the dome type magnet attachment was greater than that of the flat type magnet attachment in every direction (P<.05). CONCLUSION. Within the limitations of this study, the dome shape magnet attachment can resist vertical and lateral retentive force more superiorly than the flat type magnet attachment, regardless of angle, in the mandibular two implant model.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.35 no.4
• /
• pp.662-673
• /
• 1997

The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy between future impression and abutment impression using strain gauges. The master model used in this study was a partially edentulous mandibular metal cast with two fixture analogs on both sides. On the left, two future analogs were parallel, whereas right side, posterior future analog exhibiting a 15-degree lingual inclination. From master cast, 10 impressions were made for each of the three impression methods. The master frameworks was fabricated on the master model, and two-element strain gauge was attached to a master framework. The master framework was seated on each cast, and gold screws were tightened to 10 Ncm using a torque controller AI-1600 strain measurement system was used for strain measuring. Impression methods studied were : Group 1:abutment impression Group 2:fixture impression Group 3:combined impression (anterior:fixture impression, posterior:abutment impression) The results were as followed. 1. The strain values on X-axis and Y-axis according to the three impression methods showed no significant difference. 2. The strain values on parallel and angulated groups according to the three impression methods showed no significant difference. 3. The parallel group exhibited significantly higher accuracy in adaptation than angulated group for all experimental groups (p<0.05). In conclusion, it is considered that accuracy of implant prostheses is more affected by implant angulation than impression methods.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.38 no.4
• /
• pp.552-560
• /
• 2000

Purpose : The purpose of this study was to determine proper position and angulation of an implant for immediate implantation. Materials and Method : From the years 1997 to 2000. 52 Denta $scan^R$ views, 22 upper and 32 lower jaw with an average age of 43 and 40 respectively, were investigated, which comprise intact upper and lower 6 anterior teeth and premolars. On the Denta $scan^R$, the optimal placement for the immediated implantation was simulated. The measuring methods included 1) Angulation difference between tooth long axis and alveolar bone process. 2) Angulation difference of long axis between tooth and installing fixture 3) Distance between center of tooth at cervical area and center of fixture. 4) Distance from root apex to the bone limit of vital structure. One sample t-test was used for statistical analysis. Result : The results were as follows. 1) At the maxillary central incisor and lateral incisor, angulation difference of long axis between tooth and installing fixture was respectively 0.5 and 3.2 degrees with the fixture center's palatally positioned 2mm apart from tooth center. 2) At the lower anterior 6 teeth, that was about $-2.8^{\circ}\;to\;-4.6^{\circ}$ with the fixture center's lingually positioned 1mm apart from tooth center. 3) At the maxillary canine and premolar, that was respectively $11.8^{\circ}\;and \;7.2^{\circ}$ with the fixture center palatally positioned $2\sim2.4mm$ apart from tooth center. 4) At the lower premolar area, that was about $0^{\circ}\;to\;2^{\circ}$ with the fixture center's lingually positioned $0.5{\sim}1mm$ apart from tooth center. 5) Distance from root apex to the bone limit of vital structure, at the maxillary anterior and premolars. was the range of 10 to 12mm, and at the mandibular anterior teeth and the 1st premolar, that was the range of 18 to 20mm. Conclusion : The proper implant position of maxillary anterior and premolar teeth is as paralleled as or more buccally angulated than long axis of tooth with the fixture center's palatally positioned. In mandiblular anterior region, long axis of implants is lingully angulated compared with long axis of tooth and in premolar, almost parelleled with long axis of tooth and alveolar process.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.15 no.6
• /
• pp.290-301
• /
• 2023

PURPOSE. The study aimed to determine the influence of implant angulation on the trueness of multi-unit implant impressions taken through different techniques and strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS. As reference models, three partially edentulous mandibular models (Model 1: No angulation; Model 2: No angulation for #33, 15-degree distal angulation for #35 and #37; Model 3: No angulation for #33, 25-degree distal angulation for #35 and #37) were created by modifying the angulations of implant analogues. Using a lab scanner, these reference models were scanned. The obtained data were preserved and utilized as virtual references. Three intraoral scanning (IOS) strategies: IOS-Omnicam, ISO-Quadrant, and IOS-Consecutive, as well as two traaditional techniques: splinted open tray (OT) and closed tray (CT), were used to create impressions from each reference model. The best-fit alignment approach was used to sequentially superimpose the reference and test scan data. Computations and statistical analysis of angular (AD), linear (LD), and 3D deviations (RMS) were performed. RESULTS. Model type, impression technique, as well as interaction factor, all demonstrated a significant influence on AD and LD values for all implant locations (P < .05). The Model 1 and SOT techniques displayed the lowest mean AD and LD values across all implant locations. When considering interaction factors, CT-Model 3 and SOT-Model 1 exhibited the highest and lowest mean AD and LD values, respectively. Model type, impression technique, and interaction factor all revealed significant effects on RMS values (P ≤ .001). CT-Model 3 and SOT-Model 1 presented the highest and lowest mean RMS values, respectively. CONCLUSION. Splinted-OT and IOS-Omnicam are recommended for multi-unit implant impressions to enhance trueness, potentially benefiting subsequent manufacturing stages.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.36 no.1
• /
• pp.29-40
• /
• 2020

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of impression taking method using the encoded healing abutment, scan body and pick-up impression coping with different implant angulations. Materials and Methods: Master model was fabricated by 3D printer and three implants were placed into the model with 0°, 10° and 20° mesial angulation. The abutments were secured to each implants and master model was scanned to make a reference model. Group P model was fabricated using pick-up impression copings and model was scanned after securing the abutments. Encoded healing abutment (Group E) and scan body (Group S) were secured on the master model and digital impression was taken using intraoral scanner 15 times each. Each STL files of test groups were superimposed with reference model using best fit alignment and root mean square (RMS) value was analyzed. Results: The RMS values were lowest in Group P, followed by Group S and Group E. Group P showed significant difference with Group S and E (P < 0.05) while there was no significant difference between Group S and E. Correlation between implant angulation and RMS value was significant in Group E (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The pick-up impression coping method showed higher accuracy and there was no significant difference in accuracy between the healing abutment and the scan body. The clinical use of the encoded healing abutment is possible, but it should be used with caution in the case of angulated implant.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.59 no.3
• /
• pp.261-270
• /
• 2021

Purpose. The aim of this study was (1) to compare the reverse engineering technique with other existing measurement methods and (2) to analyze the effect of implant angulations and impression coping types on implant impression accuracy with reverse engineering technique. Materials and methods. Three different master models were fabricated and the distance between the two implant center points in parallel master model was measured with different three methods; digital caliper measurement (Group DC), optical measuring (Group OM), and reverse engineering technique (Group RE). The 90 experimental models were fabricated with three types of impression copings for the three different implant angulation and the angular and distance error rate were calculated. One-way ANOVA was used for comparison among the evaluation methods (P < .05). The error rates of experimental groups were analyzed by two-way ANOVA (P < .05). Results. While there was significant difference between Group DC and RE (P < .05), Group OM had no significant difference compared with other groups (P > .05). The standard deviations in reverse engineering were much lower than those of digital caliper and optical measurement. Hybrid groups had no significant difference from the pick-up groups in distance error rates (P > .05). Conclusion. The reverse engineering technique demonstrated its potential as an evaluation technique of 3D accuracy of impression techniques.