• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.45 no.4
• /
• pp.444-456
• /
• 2007

Statement of problem: Implant inclination and cantilever loading increse loads distributed to implants, potentially causing biomechanical complications. Controversy exists regarding the effect of the intentionally distal-inclined implant for the reduction of the cantilever length. Purpose: This study investigated the stress distribution at the bone/implant interface and prostheses with 3D finite element stress analysis by using four different cantilever lengths and implant inclinations in a mandibular implant-supported bar overdenture. Material and methods: Four 3-D finite element models were created in which 4 implants were placed in the interforaminal area and had four different cantilver lengths(10, 6.9, 4 and 1.5mm) and distal implant inclinations$(0^{\circ},\;15^{\circ},\;30^{\circ}\;and\;45^{\circ})$ respectively. Vortical forces of 120N and oblique forces of 45N were applied to the molar area. Stress distribution in the bone around the implant was analysed under different distal implant inclinations. Results: Analysis of the von Mises stresses for the bone/implant interfaces and prostheses revealed that the maximum stresses occurred at the most distal bone/implant interface and the joint of bar and abutment, located on the loaded side and significantly incresed with the implant inclinations, especially over $45^{\circ}$. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, it was suggested that too much distal inclination over 45 degrees can put the implant at risk of overload and within the dimension of the constant sum of a anterior-posterior spread and cantilever length, a distal implant inclination compared to cantilever length had the much larger effect on the stress distribution at the bone/implant interface.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.46 no.3
• /
• pp.290-297
• /
• 2008

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Implant-supported fixed cantilever prostheses are influenced by various biomechanical factors. The information that shows the effect of implant number and position of cantilever on stress in the supporting bone is limited. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of implant number variation and the effect of 2 different cantilever types on stress distribution in the supporting bone, using 3-dimensional finite element analysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A 3-D FE model of a mandibular section of bone with a missing second premolar, first molar, and second molar was developed. $4.1{\times}10$ mm screw-type dental implant was selected. 4.0 mm height solid abutments were fixed over all implant fixtures. Type III gold alloy was selected for implant-supported fixed prostheses. For mesial cantilever test, model 1-1 which has three $4.1{\times}10$ mm implants and fixed prosthesis with no pontic, model 1-2 which has two $4.1{\times}10$ mm implants and fixed prosthesis with a central pontic and model 1-3 which has two $4.1{\times}10$ mm implants and fixed prosthesis with mesial cantilever were simulated. And then, 155N oblique force was applied to the buccal cusp of second premolar. For distal cantilever test, model 2-1 which has three $4.1{\times}10$ mm implants and fixed prosthesis with no pontic, model 2-2 which has two $4.1{\times}10$ mm implants and fixed prosthesis with a central pontic and model 2-3 which has two $4.1{\times}10$ mm implants and fixed prosthesis with distal cantilever were simulated. And then, 206N oblique force was applied to the buccal cusp of second premolar. The implant and superstructure were simulated in finite element software(Pro/Engineer wildfire 2.0). The stress values were observed with the maximum von Mises stresses. RESULTS: Among the models without a cantilever, model 1-1 and 2-1 which had three implants, showed lower stress than model 1-2 and 2-2 which had two implants. Although model 2-1 was applied with 206N, it showed lower stress than model 1-2 which was applied with 155N. In models that implant positions of models were same, the amount of applied occlusal load largely influenced the maximum von Mises stress. Model 1-1, 1-2 and 1-3, which were loaded with 155N, showed less stress than corresponding model 2-1, 2-2 and 2- 3 which were loaded with 206N. For the same number of implants, the existence of a cantilever induced the obvious increase of maximum stress. Model 1-3 and 2-3 which had a cantilever, showed much higher stress than the others which had no cantilever. In all models, the von Mises stresses were concentrated at the cortical bone around the cervical region of the implants. Meanwhile, in model 1-1, 1-2 and 1-3, which were loaded on second premolar position, the first premolar participated in stress distribution. First premolars of model 2-1, 2-2 and 2-3 did not participate in stress distribution. CONCLUSION: 1. The more implants supported, the less stress was induced, regardless of applied occlusal loads. 2. The maximum von Mises stress in the bone of the implant-supported three unit fixed dental prosthesis with a mesial cantilever was 1.38 times that with a central pontic. The maximum von Mises stress in the bone of the implant-supported three-unit fixed dental prosthesis with a distal cantilever was 1.59 times that with a central pontic. 3. A distal cantilever induced larger stress in the bone than a mesial cantilever. 4. A adjacent tooth which contacts implant-supported fixed prosthesis participated in the stress distribution.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.33 no.4
• /
• pp.780-806
• /
• 1995

The purpose of this study was to describe the application of 3D finite element analysis to determine resultant stresses on the bone anchored fixed prosthesis, implants and supporting bone of the mandible according to fixture numbers and load conditions. 4 or 6 fixtures and the bone anchored fixed prosthesis were placed in 3D finite element mandibular arch model which represents an actual mandibular skull. A $45^{\circ}$ diagonal load of 10㎏ was labiolingually applied in the center of the prosthesis(P1). A $45^{\circ}$ diagonal load of 20㎏ was buccolingually applied at the location of the 10mm or 20mm cantilever posterior to the most distal implant(P2 or P3). The vertical distribution loads were applied to the superior surfaces of both the right and the left 20mm cantilevers(P4). In order that the boundary conditions of the structure were located to the mandibular ramus and angle, the distal bone plane was to totally fixed to prevent rigid body motion of the entire model. 3D finite element analysis was perfomed for stress distribution and deflection on implants and supporting bone using commercial software(ABAQUS program. for Sun-SPARC Workstation. The results were as follows : 1. In all conditions of load, the hightest tensile stresses were observed at the metal lates of prostheses. 2. The higher tensile stresses were observed at the diagonal loads rather than the vertical loads 3. 6-implants cases were more stable than 4-implants cases for decreasing bending and torque under diagonal load on the anterior of prosthesis. 4. From a biomechanical perspective, high stress developed at the metal plate of cantilever-to-the most distal implant junctions as a consequence of loads applied to the cantilever extension. 5. Under diagonal load on cantilever extension, the 6-implants cases had a tendency to reduce displacement and to increase the reaction force of supporting point due to increasing the bendign stiffness of the prosthesis than 4-implants cases. 6. Under diagonal load on cantilever extension, the case of 10mm long cantilever was more stable than that of 20mm long cnatilever in respect of stress distribution and displacement. 7. When the ends of 10mm or 20mm long cantilever were loaded, the higher tensile stress was observed at the second most distal implant rather than the first most distal implant. 8. The 6-implants cases were more favorable about prevention of screw loosening under repeated loadings because 6-implants cases had smaller deformation and 4-implants cases had larger deformation.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.484-514
• /
• 1994

Cantilever bridge is widely used by mny clinicians, but its worst mechanical character, so called Class I lever system, makes dentists hesitate to restore the missing tooth with it. Therefore it is important to study stress of the cantilever bridge. In this study, two models of cantilever bridges that restores the missing mandibular second molar with two abutment teeth were constructed. One model was a type of cantilever bridge supported by a normal alveolar bone, the other one was supported by an alveolar bone resorbed to its 1/3 of root length. Maximum bite force(550N) and funtional maximum bite force(300N) were vertically applied to the distal end of the pontic, distal 1/3, and distal half of the pontic. And each force was also applied to centric occlusal contacts as a distributed force. Total 16 loading cases were compared and analyzed with 3-dimensional finite element method. The results were as follows: 1. The stress was concentrated on the joint of the pontic and the retainer, grooves, and distal cervical margin of the posterior retainer. 2. In case of maximum bite force(550N) at the end of the pontic, the risk of fracture at the joint of the pontic and the retainer was high. 3. In case of distributed force in centric occlusion and functional maximum bite force(300N), the stresses were less than the yield strength of the type VI gold for any loading cases. 4. In case of alveolar bone resorption, the occlusal force to the cantilever pontic caused more stress on the root apex and less stress on the alveolar crest region of the distal surface of the posterior abutment. 5. In case of alveolar bone resorption, the displacement was larger than that of normal alveolar bone in all loading cases.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.33 no.1
• /
• pp.98-129
• /
• 1995

The purpose of this study was to evaluate how mandibular implant-supported fixed complete prosthesis, implant and mandible responded mechanically, according to curvature of arch, number and location of fixture, and amounts of load. The shape of mandibular arch was tapered or square form and, 4 or 6 fixtures were implanted in each arch model. A vertical load of 10kg was applied at the center of prosthesis and a vertical load of 20kg was applied at the location of the 10mm or 20mm cantilever posterior to the most distal implant. Three-dimensional finite element analysis was performed for stress distribution and deflection using commercial software(ABAQUS program) for Sun-SPARC Workstation. The results were as follows : 1. The case square arch form was more stable to compare with that of tapered arch form in respect of stress distribution and displacement under vertical load on the center of prosthesis. 2. 6-implants cases were more stable than 4-implants cases for decreasing bending torque under vertical load on the center of prosthesis. 3. Under vertical load on cantilever extension, the case of 10mm long cantilever was more stable than that of 20mm long cantilever in respect of stress distribution and displacement. 4. Under vertical load on cantilever extension, 6-implants cases had a tendency to reduce displacement and to increase the reaction force of supporting point due to increasing of the bending stiffness of the prosthesis than 4-implant case. 5. When the ends of 10mm or 20mm long cantilever were loaded, the most distal implant was under compressive stress but the second most distal implant was under the highest tensile stress and the remaining implants were under varying tensile stress. 6. Because 6-implants cases had smaller displacement than 4-implants cases, 6-implants cases were more favorable in respect of prevention of screw loosening under repeated loadings.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.75-87
• /
• 2006

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of prostheses misfit, cantilever on the stress distribution in the implant components and surrounding bone using three dimensional finite element analysis. Two standard 3-dimensional finite element models were constructed: (1) 3 ITI implant supported, 3-unit fixed partial denture and (2) 3 ITI implant supported, 3-unit fixed partial denture with a distal cantilever. variations of the standard finite element models were made by placing a $100{\mu}m$ or $200{\mu}m$ gap between the fixture, the abutment and the crown on the second premolar and first molar. Total 14 models were constructed. In each model, 244 N of vertical load and 244 N of $30^{\circ}$ oblique load were placed on the distal marginal ridge of the distal molar. von Mises stresses were recorded and compared in the crowns, abutments, crestal compact bones, and trabecular bones. The results were obtained as follows: 1. In the ITI implant system, cement-retained prostheses showed comparatively low stress distributions on all the implant components and fixtures regardless of the misfit sizes under vertical loading. The stresses were increased twice under oblique loading especially in the prostheses with cantilever, but neither showed the effects of misfit size. 2. Under the oblique loading and posterior cantilever, the stresses were highly increased in the crestal bones around ITI implants, but effects of misfit were not shown. Although higher stresses were shown on the apical portion of trabecular bones, the effects by misfit were little and the stresses were increased by the posterior cantilever. 3. When the cement loss happened in the ITI implant supported FPD with misfit, the stresses were increased in the implant componets and supporting structures.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.50 no.4
• /
• pp.268-277
• /
• 2020

This case report demonstrates two different uprighting mechanics separately applied to mesially tipped mandibular first and second molars. The biomechanical considerations for application of these mechanisms are also discussed. For repositioning of the first molar, which was severely tipped and deeply impacted, a novel cantilever mechanics was used. The molar tube was bonded in the buccolingual direction to facilitate insertion of a cantilever from the buccal side. By twisting the distal end of the cantilever, sufficient uprighting moment was generated. The mesial end of the cantilever was hooked over the miniscrew placed between the canine and first premolar, which could prevent exertion of an intrusive force to the anterior portion of the dentition as a side effect. For repositioning of the second molar, an uprighting mechanics using a compression force with two step bends incorporated into a nickel-titanium archwire was employed. This generated an uprighting moment as well as a distal force acting on the tipped second molar to regain the lost space for the first molar and bring it into its normal position. This epoch-making uprighting mechanics could also minimize the extrusion of the molar, thereby preventing occlusal interference by increasing interocclusal clearance between the inferiorly placed two step bends and the antagonist tooth. Consequently, the two step bends could help prevent occlusal interference. After 2 years and 11 months of active treatment, a desirable Class I occlusion was successfully achieved without permanent tooth extraction.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.40 no.5
• /
• pp.507-524
• /
• 2002

Load transfer of implant overdenture varies depending on anchorage systems that are the design of the superstructure and substructure and the choice of attachment. Overload by using improper anchorage system not only will cause fracture of the framework or screw but also may cause failure of osseointegration. Choosing anchorage system in making prosthesis, therefore, can be considered to be one of the most important factors that affect long-term success of implant treatment. In this study, in order to determine the effect of anchorage systems on load transfer in mandibular implant overdenture in which 4 implants were placed in the interforaminal region, patterns of stress distribution in implant supporting bone in case of unilateral vertical loading on mandibular left first molar were compared each other according to various types of anchorage system using three-dimensional photoelastic stress analysis. The five photoelastic overdenture models utilizing Hader bar without cantilever using clips(type 1), cantilevered Hader bar using clips(type 2), cantilevered Hader bar with milled surface using clips(type 3), cantilevered milled-bar using swivel-latchs and frictional pins(type 4), and Hader bar using clip and ERA attachments(type 5), and one cantilevered fixed-detachable prosthesis(type 6) model as control were fabricated. The following conclusions were drawn within the limitations of this study, 1. In all experimental models. the highest stress was concentrated on the most distal implant supporting bone on loaded side. 2. Maximum fringe orders on ipsilateral distal implant supporting bone in a ascending order is as follows: type 5, type 1, type 4, type 2 and type 3, and type 6. 3. Regardless of anchorage systems. more or less stresses were generated on the residual ridge under distal extension base of all overdenture models. To summarize the above mentioned results, in case of the patients with unfavorable biomechanical conditions such as not sufficient number of supporting implants, short length of the implant and unfavorable antero-posterior spread. selecting resilient type attachment or minimizing distal cantilever bar is considered to be appropriate methods to prevent overloading on implants by reducing cantilever effect and gaining more support from the distal residual ridge.

• Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
• /
• v.35 no.4
• /
• pp.248-252
• /
• 2009

Purpose: This retrospective study was performed to analyze the relationship between complications of the posterior mandibular single crowns and distance from the adjacent teeth to the implant. Subjects and Methods: Of the patients who presented Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital & Yonsei University Dental Hospital with missing of the posterior mandibular molar and restored with implant-supported 18 Single crowns between 1996 thru 2007, 115 patients had been followed after crown delivery. The subjects were divided into complication-followed group and a control without any problems. The distance from the most distal tooth to the implant were measured. The prosthetic & biologic complications were reviewed by the cantilever distance and analyzed by abutment type, age & gender statistically using SAS version 9.1 (SAS Inc., USA). Results and Conclusion The results were as follows; 1) The posterior mandibular single crown with cantilever showed higher incidence of follow-up complications upon logistic analysis (p<0.05). 2) The prosthetic and biologic complications are related with the cantilever distance with 2.1 odds ratio and 3.39 cut-off value of specificity & sensitivity by SPSS 12.0. 3) The complications are neither significant in abutment types nor age & gender.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.36 no.4
• /
• pp.615-643
• /
• 1998

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of cantilever length, load, and implant number on the stress distribution of implant supported fixed prosthesis. In the replica of an edentulous human mandible, four or five implants were placed and spaced evenly between the mental foramina and symmetrical gold alloy cast superstructures with cantilever were fabricated. Strain gauges were placed in buccal and lingual side of implants. 9, 15, 21kg of loads at varying cantilever lengths were applied to the occlusal surface of fixed prostheses. The strains were recorded from each gauge and principal stresses were calculated The results were as follows : 1. Increasing the length of the cantilever increased the stresses on the bone supporting implants. and the ratio of increase became high as increasing the load. 2. In the model with four implants, the highest compressive stress was measured on lingual side of the first implants nearest loading point and the highest tensile stress was measured on buccal side of the second implants. 3. In the model with five implants, the highest compressive stress was measured on lingual side of the first implants nearest loading point. And the highest tensile stress was measured on buccal side of the second implants, and lingual side of the third implants. 4. There was no significant change of the magnitude of stress on the most distal imp]ant of non cantilevered side as increasing the cantilever length or load. 5. In general, the superstructure supported by five implants reduced the stress and was less affected by cantilever length compared to the support provided by four implants.