- Email: [email protected]
Finite element stress analysis of dental prostheses supported by straight and angled implants
346
Volume 104 Issue 5 surfaces to achieve the desired centric and eccentric contacts (Fig. 9). Refine the occlusal anatomy. 21. Perform a verified clinical remount and repeat the process outlined in step 20 above.
SUMMARY This article provides a brief overview of the development of lingualized occlusion and a technique that results in an occlusal scheme as intended by the originators of this approach.
REFERENCES 1. Parr GR, Loft GH. The occlusal spectrum and complete dentures. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1982; 3:241-50. 2. Parr GR, Ivanhoe JR. Lingualized occlusion: an occlusion for all reasons. Dent Clin North Am 1996;40:103-12.
3. Lang BR, Razzoog ME. Lingualized integration: Tooth molds and an occlusal scheme for edentulous implant patients. Implant Dent 1992;1:204-11. 4. Ortman HR. Complete denture occlusion. In: Winkler S, editor. Essentials of complete denture prosthodontics, vol 1. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Ishiyaku EuroAmerica; 1994. p. 217-29. 5. Gysi A. Special teeth for cross-bite cases. Dent Digest 1927;33:167-71. 6. French FA. The problem of building satisfactory dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1954;4:769-81. 7. Payne SH. A posterior set-up to meet individual requirements. Dent Digest 1941;47:20-2. 8. Pound E. Personalized denture procedures. Anaheim: Denar Corp; 1973. p. 4. 9. Pound E. Utilizing speech to simplify a personalized denture service. J Prosthet Dent 1970;24:586-600. 10.Ortman HR. The role of occlusion in preservation and prevention in completed denture prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 1971;25:121-38. 11.Murrell GA. The management of difficult lower dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1974;32:243-50.
12.Becker CM, Swoope CC, Guckes AD. Lingualized occlusion for removable prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 1977;38:601-8. 13.Kelly E. Centric relation, centric occlusion and posterior tooth forms and arrangement. J Prosthet Dent 1977; 37:5-11. 14.Javid NS, Porter MR. The importance of the Hanau formula in construction of complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1975;34:397404. 15.Hanau RL. Full denture technique for Hanau Articulator Model H. 4 th ed. Buffalo: Hanau Engineering; 1930. Corresponding author: Dr Robert Engelmeier University of Pittsburgh School of Dental Medicine Salk Hall, Room 2025 3501 Terrace St Pittsburgh, PA 15261 Fax: 412-648-8850 E-mail: [email protected] Copyright © 2010 by the Editorial Council for The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
Noteworthy Abstracts of the Current Literature Finite element stress analysis of dental prostheses supported by straight and angled implants Cruz M, Wassall T, Toledo EM, da Silva Barra LP, Cruz S. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:391-403. Purpose: A three-dimensional finite element analysis was conducted to evaluate and compare the stress distribution around two prosthesis-implant systems, in which implants were arranged in either a straight-line or an intrabone offset configuration. Materials and Methods: The systems were modeled with three titanium implants placed in the posterior mandible following a straight line along the bone. The straight system was built with three straight implants (no offset). The angled system was built as follows: the first implant (mesial) was an angled implant inclined lingually, the second (median) was straight, and the third (distal) was another angled implant inclined buccally. This buccal incline created an intrabone implant offset owing to the inclination of the angled implants’ bodies. Each system received a metal-ceramic prosthesis with crowns that mimicked premolar anatomy. In both systems, an axial load of 100 N and a horizontal load of 20 N were applied on the center of the crown of the middle implant. Results: In both systems, the major von Mises stresses occurred with vertical loading on the mesial and the distal neck area of the first and third implants, respectively: 6.304 MPa on the first implant of the straight system and 6.173 MPa on the third implant in the angled system. The peak stress occurred for the minimum principal stress (S3) on the neck of the first implant for both systems at the level of -8.835 MPa for the straight system and -8.511 MPa for the angled system. There was no stress concentration on the inner or outer angles of the angled implants, on the notches along the implant body, or on any apex. Conclusions: In this analysis, the angled system did not induce a stress concentration in any point around the implants that was different from that of the straight system. The stress distribution was very similar in both systems. Reprinted with permission of Quintessence Publishing.
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Phoenix and Engelmeier
Volume 104 Issue 5 surfaces to achieve the desired centric and eccentric contacts (Fig. 9). Refine the occlusal anatomy. 21. Perform a verified clinical remount and repeat the process outlined in step 20 above.
SUMMARY This article provides a brief overview of the development of lingualized occlusion and a technique that results in an occlusal scheme as intended by the originators of this approach.
REFERENCES 1. Parr GR, Loft GH. The occlusal spectrum and complete dentures. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1982; 3:241-50. 2. Parr GR, Ivanhoe JR. Lingualized occlusion: an occlusion for all reasons. Dent Clin North Am 1996;40:103-12.
3. Lang BR, Razzoog ME. Lingualized integration: Tooth molds and an occlusal scheme for edentulous implant patients. Implant Dent 1992;1:204-11. 4. Ortman HR. Complete denture occlusion. In: Winkler S, editor. Essentials of complete denture prosthodontics, vol 1. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Ishiyaku EuroAmerica; 1994. p. 217-29. 5. Gysi A. Special teeth for cross-bite cases. Dent Digest 1927;33:167-71. 6. French FA. The problem of building satisfactory dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1954;4:769-81. 7. Payne SH. A posterior set-up to meet individual requirements. Dent Digest 1941;47:20-2. 8. Pound E. Personalized denture procedures. Anaheim: Denar Corp; 1973. p. 4. 9. Pound E. Utilizing speech to simplify a personalized denture service. J Prosthet Dent 1970;24:586-600. 10.Ortman HR. The role of occlusion in preservation and prevention in completed denture prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 1971;25:121-38. 11.Murrell GA. The management of difficult lower dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1974;32:243-50.
12.Becker CM, Swoope CC, Guckes AD. Lingualized occlusion for removable prosthodontics. J Prosthet Dent 1977;38:601-8. 13.Kelly E. Centric relation, centric occlusion and posterior tooth forms and arrangement. J Prosthet Dent 1977; 37:5-11. 14.Javid NS, Porter MR. The importance of the Hanau formula in construction of complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1975;34:397404. 15.Hanau RL. Full denture technique for Hanau Articulator Model H. 4 th ed. Buffalo: Hanau Engineering; 1930. Corresponding author: Dr Robert Engelmeier University of Pittsburgh School of Dental Medicine Salk Hall, Room 2025 3501 Terrace St Pittsburgh, PA 15261 Fax: 412-648-8850 E-mail: [email protected] Copyright © 2010 by the Editorial Council for The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
Noteworthy Abstracts of the Current Literature Finite element stress analysis of dental prostheses supported by straight and angled implants Cruz M, Wassall T, Toledo EM, da Silva Barra LP, Cruz S. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:391-403. Purpose: A three-dimensional finite element analysis was conducted to evaluate and compare the stress distribution around two prosthesis-implant systems, in which implants were arranged in either a straight-line or an intrabone offset configuration. Materials and Methods: The systems were modeled with three titanium implants placed in the posterior mandible following a straight line along the bone. The straight system was built with three straight implants (no offset). The angled system was built as follows: the first implant (mesial) was an angled implant inclined lingually, the second (median) was straight, and the third (distal) was another angled implant inclined buccally. This buccal incline created an intrabone implant offset owing to the inclination of the angled implants’ bodies. Each system received a metal-ceramic prosthesis with crowns that mimicked premolar anatomy. In both systems, an axial load of 100 N and a horizontal load of 20 N were applied on the center of the crown of the middle implant. Results: In both systems, the major von Mises stresses occurred with vertical loading on the mesial and the distal neck area of the first and third implants, respectively: 6.304 MPa on the first implant of the straight system and 6.173 MPa on the third implant in the angled system. The peak stress occurred for the minimum principal stress (S3) on the neck of the first implant for both systems at the level of -8.835 MPa for the straight system and -8.511 MPa for the angled system. There was no stress concentration on the inner or outer angles of the angled implants, on the notches along the implant body, or on any apex. Conclusions: In this analysis, the angled system did not induce a stress concentration in any point around the implants that was different from that of the straight system. The stress distribution was very similar in both systems. Reprinted with permission of Quintessence Publishing.
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Phoenix and Engelmeier