Comparative analysis of stress distribution in one-piece and two-piece implants with narrow and extra-narrow diameters: A finite element study.

<h4>Objectives</h4>The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the stress distribution on three implant models with narrow and extra-narrow diameters using the finite element method (FEA).<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Dental implants of extra-narrow diameter of 2.5 mm for...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fabricia Teixeira Barbosa, Luiz Carlos Silveira Zanatta, Edélcio de Souza Rendohl, Sergio Alexandre Gehrke
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0245800
Description
Summary:<h4>Objectives</h4>The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the stress distribution on three implant models with narrow and extra-narrow diameters using the finite element method (FEA).<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Dental implants of extra-narrow diameter of 2.5 mm for a one-piece implant (group G1), a narrow diameter of 3.0 mm for a one-piece implant (group G2) and a narrow diameter of 3.5 mm for a two-piece implant with a Morse taper connection (group G3). A three-dimensional model was designed with cortical and cancellous bone, a crown and an implant/abutment set of each group. Axial and angled (30°) loads of 150 N was applied. The equivalent von Mises stress was used for the implants and peri-implant bone plus the Mohr-Coulomb analysis to confirm the data of the peri-implant bone.<h4>Results</h4>In the axial load, the maximum stress value of the cortical bone for the group G1 was 22.35% higher than that the group G2 and 321.23% than the group G3. Whereas in angled load, the groups G1 and G2 showing a similar value (# 3.5%) and a highest difference for the group G3 (391.8%). In the implant structure, the group G1 showed a value of 2188MPa, 93.6% higher than the limit.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The results of this study show that the extra-narrow one-piece implant should be used with great caution, especially in areas of non-axial loads, whereas the one- and two-piece narrow-diameter implants show adequate behavior in both directions of the applied load.
ISSN:1932-6203