Abstract
The performance of an implant-supported prosthesis depends on the implant type, number, implant location, and prosthesis design which is directly associated with the distribution of the occlusal forces during mastication. Thepurpose of the present study is to analyze with three-dimensional (3D) finite element comparative analysis, the influence of implant location, number, and prosthesis design in the mandibular posterior region where multiple posterior teeth replacement is indicated, which in turn is associated with the longevity or Implant success rate. Mandibular posterior section, where 4 teeth are missing, based on the space available for implants and following the surgical guide instructions, a standard make four implants (1st and 2nd premolars {3.8 mm × 11.5 mm}, 1st and 2nd molar {5.1 mm × 11.5 mm}) were selected and with standardization for placement, 4 groups were created with different implant location, number and prosthesis design from the selected implants as model FM1, FM2, FM3, FM4. Finite element analysis was carried out usingANSYS software, version 14.5 (ANSYS Inc.,Canonsburg, PA, USA) for assessment of stress, strain, and deformation around implant and bone. Maximum von Mises stress on vertical loading was highest for FM4 (139.55MPa) model (center of prosthesis on premolar and molar pontics) and lowest for FM3 (53.65MPa) model (on 2ndpremolar pontic) with values in decreasing order as FM4 ˃ FM2 ˃ FM1 ˃ FM3. Maximum von Mises stress on oblique loading was highest at the distal of 1stmolar implant pontic for FM2 (539.81MPa) and lowest at the 2ndpremolar pontic for FM3 (352.48MPa) model with values as FM2˃FM1˃FM4˃FM3. Deformation for vertical and oblique loading was observed minimum at the buccal cusp and buccal crestal bone of 2ndpremolar, 1stmolaron FM3 model against highest deformation on buccal and lingual crestal bone, cuspal area of 2ndpremolar, 1stmolar implants. For oblique loading minimum deformation was seenfor the 2ndpremolar, 1stmolar cuspal area in FM3,and maximum at the 2ndpremolar region in FM1. Four single implants may be chosen if there is enough mesiodistal and buccolingual space to allow for a minimum inter-implant and inter-implant-tooth distance that can be maintained while putting the least amount of stress on the implants and bone. To reduce stress on the bone and implants, it is best to avoid long-span implant-supported prostheses when using fixed implant-supported prostheses.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
