Effects of splinted prosthesis supported a wide implant or two implants: A three-dimensional finite element analysis

Heng Li Huang, Jehn Shyun Huang, Ching Chang Ko, Jui Ting Hsu, Chih Han Chang, Michael Y.C. Chen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

48 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: Three-dimensional finite element (FE) models of splinted prosthetic crowns were studied and stress analyses were evaluated with different types of implant support, including standard, wide or two implant(s) for partial, posterior edentulous restorations. Material and methods: The FE models were constructed based on a cadaver mandible containing the 2nd premolar and the 1st molar. The crowns of these two teeth were modeled as connected and disconnected to mimic the splinted and non-splinted designs, respectively. One standard implant was placed at the premolar region, while three types of implant support, one at a time (the standard implant, wide implant and two implants), were used to support the molar crown. A 100 N oblique load was applied to the buccal cusp on each crown. The FE simulation was validated experimentally via strain gauge measurement. Results: The experimental data were well correlated with the FE predictions (r2=0.97). When compared with the standard implant used in the molar area, the wide implant and two implants reduced the peak stress in crestal bone by 29-37% for both splinted and non-splinted cases. Inserting the standard implant into both the premolar and molar area, the bone stresses were identical for splinted and non-splinted designs. However, splinting the adjacent crowns has shown to decrease the bone stresses at the premolar region by 25%, while the wide implant or two implants were placed at the molar region. Conclusion: The biomechanical advantages of using the wide implant or two implants are almost identical. The benefit of load sharing by the splinted crowns is notable only when the implants on the premolar and molar regions have different supporting ability.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)466-472
Number of pages7
JournalClinical Oral Implants Research
Volume16
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2005 Aug 1

Fingerprint

Finite Element Analysis
Bicuspid
Crowns
Prostheses and Implants
Bone and Bones
Tooth Crown
Cheek
Mandible
Cadaver

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Oral Surgery

Cite this

@article{de3b2bdc63bf4635a800b282f597ac01,
title = "Effects of splinted prosthesis supported a wide implant or two implants: A three-dimensional finite element analysis",
abstract = "Objectives: Three-dimensional finite element (FE) models of splinted prosthetic crowns were studied and stress analyses were evaluated with different types of implant support, including standard, wide or two implant(s) for partial, posterior edentulous restorations. Material and methods: The FE models were constructed based on a cadaver mandible containing the 2nd premolar and the 1st molar. The crowns of these two teeth were modeled as connected and disconnected to mimic the splinted and non-splinted designs, respectively. One standard implant was placed at the premolar region, while three types of implant support, one at a time (the standard implant, wide implant and two implants), were used to support the molar crown. A 100 N oblique load was applied to the buccal cusp on each crown. The FE simulation was validated experimentally via strain gauge measurement. Results: The experimental data were well correlated with the FE predictions (r2=0.97). When compared with the standard implant used in the molar area, the wide implant and two implants reduced the peak stress in crestal bone by 29-37{\%} for both splinted and non-splinted cases. Inserting the standard implant into both the premolar and molar area, the bone stresses were identical for splinted and non-splinted designs. However, splinting the adjacent crowns has shown to decrease the bone stresses at the premolar region by 25{\%}, while the wide implant or two implants were placed at the molar region. Conclusion: The biomechanical advantages of using the wide implant or two implants are almost identical. The benefit of load sharing by the splinted crowns is notable only when the implants on the premolar and molar regions have different supporting ability.",
author = "Huang, {Heng Li} and Huang, {Jehn Shyun} and Ko, {Ching Chang} and Hsu, {Jui Ting} and Chang, {Chih Han} and Chen, {Michael Y.C.}",
year = "2005",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01124.x",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "466--472",
journal = "Clinical Oral Implants Research",
issn = "0905-7161",
publisher = "Blackwell Munksgaard",
number = "4",

}

Effects of splinted prosthesis supported a wide implant or two implants : A three-dimensional finite element analysis. / Huang, Heng Li; Huang, Jehn Shyun; Ko, Ching Chang; Hsu, Jui Ting; Chang, Chih Han; Chen, Michael Y.C.

In: Clinical Oral Implants Research, Vol. 16, No. 4, 01.08.2005, p. 466-472.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of splinted prosthesis supported a wide implant or two implants

T2 - A three-dimensional finite element analysis

AU - Huang, Heng Li

AU - Huang, Jehn Shyun

AU - Ko, Ching Chang

AU - Hsu, Jui Ting

AU - Chang, Chih Han

AU - Chen, Michael Y.C.

PY - 2005/8/1

Y1 - 2005/8/1

N2 - Objectives: Three-dimensional finite element (FE) models of splinted prosthetic crowns were studied and stress analyses were evaluated with different types of implant support, including standard, wide or two implant(s) for partial, posterior edentulous restorations. Material and methods: The FE models were constructed based on a cadaver mandible containing the 2nd premolar and the 1st molar. The crowns of these two teeth were modeled as connected and disconnected to mimic the splinted and non-splinted designs, respectively. One standard implant was placed at the premolar region, while three types of implant support, one at a time (the standard implant, wide implant and two implants), were used to support the molar crown. A 100 N oblique load was applied to the buccal cusp on each crown. The FE simulation was validated experimentally via strain gauge measurement. Results: The experimental data were well correlated with the FE predictions (r2=0.97). When compared with the standard implant used in the molar area, the wide implant and two implants reduced the peak stress in crestal bone by 29-37% for both splinted and non-splinted cases. Inserting the standard implant into both the premolar and molar area, the bone stresses were identical for splinted and non-splinted designs. However, splinting the adjacent crowns has shown to decrease the bone stresses at the premolar region by 25%, while the wide implant or two implants were placed at the molar region. Conclusion: The biomechanical advantages of using the wide implant or two implants are almost identical. The benefit of load sharing by the splinted crowns is notable only when the implants on the premolar and molar regions have different supporting ability.

AB - Objectives: Three-dimensional finite element (FE) models of splinted prosthetic crowns were studied and stress analyses were evaluated with different types of implant support, including standard, wide or two implant(s) for partial, posterior edentulous restorations. Material and methods: The FE models were constructed based on a cadaver mandible containing the 2nd premolar and the 1st molar. The crowns of these two teeth were modeled as connected and disconnected to mimic the splinted and non-splinted designs, respectively. One standard implant was placed at the premolar region, while three types of implant support, one at a time (the standard implant, wide implant and two implants), were used to support the molar crown. A 100 N oblique load was applied to the buccal cusp on each crown. The FE simulation was validated experimentally via strain gauge measurement. Results: The experimental data were well correlated with the FE predictions (r2=0.97). When compared with the standard implant used in the molar area, the wide implant and two implants reduced the peak stress in crestal bone by 29-37% for both splinted and non-splinted cases. Inserting the standard implant into both the premolar and molar area, the bone stresses were identical for splinted and non-splinted designs. However, splinting the adjacent crowns has shown to decrease the bone stresses at the premolar region by 25%, while the wide implant or two implants were placed at the molar region. Conclusion: The biomechanical advantages of using the wide implant or two implants are almost identical. The benefit of load sharing by the splinted crowns is notable only when the implants on the premolar and molar regions have different supporting ability.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=26944480482&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=26944480482&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01124.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2005.01124.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 16117772

AN - SCOPUS:26944480482

VL - 16

SP - 466

EP - 472

JO - Clinical Oral Implants Research

JF - Clinical Oral Implants Research

SN - 0905-7161

IS - 4

ER -