Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2017; 11(02): 186-191
DOI: 10.4103/1305-7456.208432
Original Article
Dental Investigation Society

New dental implant selection criterion based on implant design

Mohamed I. El-Anwar
1   Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Research Centre, Giza, Egypt
,
Mohamed M. El-Zawahry
2   Department of Prosthodontics, National Research Centre, Giza, Egypt
,
Eman M. Ibraheem
2   Department of Prosthodontics, National Research Centre, Giza, Egypt
,
Mohammad Zakaria Nassani
3   Department of Prosthetic Dental Sciences, AlFarabi College for Dentistry and Nursing, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
,
Hisham ElGabry
2   Department of Prosthodontics, National Research Centre, Giza, Egypt
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
23 September 2019 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Objective: A comparative study between threaded and plain dental implant designs was performed to find out a new criterion for dental implant selection. Materials and Methods: Several dental implant designs with a systematic increase in diameter and length were positioned in a cylindrical-shaped bone section and analyzed using finite element method. Four loading types were tested on different dental implant designs; tension of 50 N, compression of 100 N, bending of 20 N, and torque of 2 Nm, to derive design curves. Results: Better stress distribution on both spongy and cortical bone was noted with an increase in dental implant diameter and length. With the increase in dental implant side area, a stress reduction in the surrounding bones was observed, where threaded dental implants showed better behavior over the plain ones. Conclusions: Increasing value of ratio between dental implant side area and its cross-sectional area reduces stresses transferred to cortical and spongy bones. The use of implants with higher ratio of side area to cross-section area, especially with weak jaw bone, is recommended.

Key words:

Dental implant design - finite element method - dental implant selection
 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Chee WW, Nowzari H, Kaneko L. Esthetic replacement of the anterior tooth with an implant-supported restoration. J Calif Dent Assoc 1997; 25: 860-5
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Priest G. Single-tooth implants and their role in preserving remaining teeth: A 10-year survival study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999; 14: 181-8
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Sakka S, Baroudi K, Nassani MZ. Factors associated with early and late failure of dental implants. J Investig Clin Dent 2012; 3: 258-61
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Cicciu M, Bramanti E, Matacena G, Guglielmino E, Risitano G. FEM evaluation of cemented-retained versus screw-retained dental implant single-tooth crown prosthesis. Int J Clin Exp Med 2014; 7: 817-25
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Shalabi MM, Gortemaker A, Van't Hof MA, Jansen JA, Creugers NH. Implant surface roughness and bone healing: A systematic review. J Dent Res 2006; 85: 496-500
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Baggi L, Cappelloni I, Di Girolamo, Maceri F, Vairo G. The influence of implant diameter and length on stress distribution of osseointegrated implants related to crestal bone geometry: A three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2008; 100: 422-31
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Cicciù M, Cervino G, Bramanti E, Lauritano F, Lo Gudice G, Scappaticci L. et al. FEM analysis of mandibular prosthetic overdenture supported by dental implants: Evaluation of different retention methods. Comput Math Methods Med 2015; 2015-943839
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Cicciù M, Risitano G, Maiorana C, Franceschini G. Parametric analysis of the strength in the ''Toronto'' osseous-prosthesis system. Minerva Stomatol 2009; 58: 9-23
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Lauritano F, Runci M, Cervino G, Fiorillo L, Bramanti E, Cicciù M. Three-dimensional evaluation of different prosthesis retention systems using finite element analysis and the Von Mises stress test. Minerva Stomatol 2016; 65: 353-67
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Holmgren EP, Seckinger RJ, Kilgren LM, Mante F. Evaluating parameters of osseointegrated dental implants using finite element analysis – A two-dimensional comparative study examining the effects of implant diameter, implant shape, and load direction. J Oral Implantol 1998; 24: 80-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Gaetti-Jardim EC, Santiago-Junior JF, Goiato MC, Pellizer EP, Magro-Filho O, Jardim Junior EG. Dental implants in patients with osteoporosis: A clinical reality?. J Craniofac Surg 2011; 22: 1111-3
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 El-Anwar MI, El-Zawahry MM. A three dimensional finite element study on dental implant design. J Genet Eng Biotechnol 2011; 9: 77-82
    Google Scholar
  • 13 El-Zawahry MM, El-Anwar MI, Elragi A, Jandali R. Studying the influence of different implant designs subjected to various loading types on bone stress distribution. Egypt Med J Natl Res Cent 2009; 8: 23-7
    Google Scholar
  • 14 El-Anwar MI, El-Zawahry MM, El-Mofty MS. Load transfers on dental implants and surrounding bones. Aust J Basic Appl Sci 2012; 6: 551-60
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Cruz M, Wassall T, Toledo EM, Barra LP, Lemonge AC. Three-dimensional finite element stress analysis of a cuneiform-geometry implant. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003; 18: 675-84
    Google Scholar
  • 16 El-Anwar MI, El-Mofty MS, Awad AH, El-Sheikh SA, El-Zawahry MM. The effect of using different crown and implant materials on bone stress distribution: A finite element study. Egypt J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014; 5: 58-64
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Geng JP, Xu DW, Tan KB, Liu GR. Finite element analysis of an osseointegrated stepped screw dental implant. J Oral Implantol 2004; 30: 223-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Abdel Azim A, Zaki A, El-Anwar M. Single molar restoration: Wide implant versus two conventional. Dent Trib U K Ed 2014; 4: 12-4
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Bozkaya D, Muftu S, Muftu A. Evaluation of load transfer characteristics of five different implants in compact bone at different load levels by finite elements analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 92: 523-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Himmlova L, Dostalova T, Kacovsky A, Konvickova S. Influence of implant length and diameter on stress distribution: A finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 91: 20-5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Tawil G, Aboujaoude N, Younan R. Influence of prosthetic parameters on the survival and complication rates of short implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2006; 21: 275-82
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Pierrisnard L, Renouard F, Renult P, Barquins M. Influence of implant length and bicortical anchorage on implant stress distribution. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003; 5: 254-62
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Murakami K, Yamamoto K, Sugiura T, Kawakami M, Kang Y, Tsutsumi S. et al. Effect of clenching on biomechanical response of human mandible and tempromandibular joint of traumatic force analyzed by finite element method. Med Oral Pathol Oral Cir Bucal 2013; 18: e473-8
    Google Scholar