Journal of prosthodontic research · 2024
A finite element study on the risk of bone loss around posterior short implants in an atrophic mandible.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Gialain Ivan Onone, Gantier-Takano Marlene Kasumi, Silva Leonardo Folmer Rodrigues da, Roscoe Marina Guimarães, Pinhata-Baptista Otavio Henrique, Meira Josete Barbosa Cruz, Fok Alex Siu Lun
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the risk of bone loss around single short molar crown-supporting implants in an atrophic mandible.
METHODS: Implants of different lengths (L = 4 or 6 mm) and diameters (Ø = 4.1 or 4.8 mm) were placed in the molar area of an atrophic mandible. Additional control mandible models were simulated for 4.1 mm diameter implants (L = 4, 6, 8, and 10 mm). A vertical masticatory load of 200 N was applied to three or six occlusal contact areas (3ca or 6ca) of the prosthetic crown. The bone strain energy density (SED) of 109.6 µJ/mm3 was assumed to be the pathological threshold for cortical bone. The peri-implant bone resorption risk index (PIBRri) was calculated by dividing the maximum SED of the crestal cortical bone by the SED pathological threshold.
RESULTS: Increasing the implant length from 4 to 6 mm, implant diameter from 4.1 to 4.8 mm, and number of contact areas from 3 to 6 reduced the SED and PIBRri values by approximately 20%, 35%, and 40%, respectively, when comparing pairs of models that isolated a specific variable. All models with 6ca had a low bone resorption risk (PIBRri<0.8), while the Ø4.1 short implant with 3ca had a medium (0.8≤PIBRri≤1.0) or high (PIBRri>1.0) resorption risk.
CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the diameter or occlusal contact area of a 4 mm short implant in an atrophic mandible resulted in reduced bone resorption risks, similar to or lower than those observed in a regular mandible with standard-length implants.
METHODS: Implants of different lengths (L = 4 or 6 mm) and diameters (Ø = 4.1 or 4.8 mm) were placed in the molar area of an atrophic mandible. Additional control mandible models were simulated for 4.1 mm diameter implants (L = 4, 6, 8, and 10 mm). A vertical masticatory load of 200 N was applied to three or six occlusal contact areas (3ca or 6ca) of the prosthetic crown. The bone strain energy density (SED) of 109.6 µJ/mm3 was assumed to be the pathological threshold for cortical bone. The peri-implant bone resorption risk index (PIBRri) was calculated by dividing the maximum SED of the crestal cortical bone by the SED pathological threshold.
RESULTS: Increasing the implant length from 4 to 6 mm, implant diameter from 4.1 to 4.8 mm, and number of contact areas from 3 to 6 reduced the SED and PIBRri values by approximately 20%, 35%, and 40%, respectively, when comparing pairs of models that isolated a specific variable. All models with 6ca had a low bone resorption risk (PIBRri<0.8), while the Ø4.1 short implant with 3ca had a medium (0.8≤PIBRri≤1.0) or high (PIBRri>1.0) resorption risk.
CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the diameter or occlusal contact area of a 4 mm short implant in an atrophic mandible resulted in reduced bone resorption risks, similar to or lower than those observed in a regular mandible with standard-length implants.