The Journal of prosthetic dentistry · 2025
Biomechanical behavior of implant-abutment complex made of titanium, zirconia, carbon-fiber-reinforced PEEK, glass-fiber-reinforced PEEK, and PEKK versus four different bony structure configurations: A 3D finite element analysis study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Elkersh Noha M, Ramadan Rania E, Abd-Ellah Mervat E
Аннотация
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Implant-abutment complex material and bone density are 2 important factors for long term success of implant therapy. Titanium has been used for many years; however, stress shielding associated with it led to the introduction of other material such as zirconia, carbon-reinforced polyetheretherketone (CF-PEEK), glass-reinforced polyetheretherketone (GF-PEEK), and polyetherketoneketone (PEKK). Studies evaluating biomechanical behavior of different implant-abutment complex material in different bone densities are lacking.
PURPOSE: The aim of the current study was to evaluate the biomechanical behavior of different implant-abutment complex material in different bony structure configurations.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty virtual models were used having 5 different implant-abutment complex material: titanium, zirconia, CF- PEEK, GR-PEEK, and PEKK in different bone densities classified by Misch (D1, D2, D3, and D4). Occlusal loads were applied simultaneously to the abutment in each model in 2 directions: 200 N axially and 178 N obliquely. Static structural analysis was applied to each model. Equivalent von Mises stress and strain were evaluated in cortical, cancellous bone, implant, and abutment of all models. Post hoc pair-wise comparisons and Dunn-Sidak test were used for multiple comparison corrections (α=.05).
RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were detected in equivalent von Mises stress in cortical and cancellous bone among different implant-abutment complex material in each bone density type (P<.05). However, no differences were detected in equivalent von Mises stresses induced in implant and abutment among different material in D2, D3, and D4 bone densities (P>.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Biomechanical behavior of different implant-abutment complex material differed in different bone densities. Zirconia is recommended in high bone density (D1 and D2). Titanium and zirconia act similarly in D3 bone density. CF-PEEK was found to be a favorable choice in low bone density (D4). PEKK induced the highest stress and strain values.
PURPOSE: The aim of the current study was to evaluate the biomechanical behavior of different implant-abutment complex material in different bony structure configurations.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty virtual models were used having 5 different implant-abutment complex material: titanium, zirconia, CF- PEEK, GR-PEEK, and PEKK in different bone densities classified by Misch (D1, D2, D3, and D4). Occlusal loads were applied simultaneously to the abutment in each model in 2 directions: 200 N axially and 178 N obliquely. Static structural analysis was applied to each model. Equivalent von Mises stress and strain were evaluated in cortical, cancellous bone, implant, and abutment of all models. Post hoc pair-wise comparisons and Dunn-Sidak test were used for multiple comparison corrections (α=.05).
RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were detected in equivalent von Mises stress in cortical and cancellous bone among different implant-abutment complex material in each bone density type (P<.05). However, no differences were detected in equivalent von Mises stresses induced in implant and abutment among different material in D2, D3, and D4 bone densities (P>.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Biomechanical behavior of different implant-abutment complex material differed in different bone densities. Zirconia is recommended in high bone density (D1 and D2). Titanium and zirconia act similarly in D3 bone density. CF-PEEK was found to be a favorable choice in low bone density (D4). PEKK induced the highest stress and strain values.