Numerical Simulations of the Global Behaviour of Implant Supported or Retained Dental Prostheses

Abstract:

In spite of the recent efforts concerning prevention and treatment of dental diseases, total edentulism remains an important world health problem, even in industrialized countries. Different solutions to mandibular total edentulism are available from the classical removable denture to the implant supported prostheses. The aim of the present work is to compare, through finite element simulations, two distinct types of prosthetic solutions. The first one is an implant-supported prosthesis (ISP) using a “All-On-Four” base and the second one is a mandibular implant-retained overdenture (IRO) using two implants. A foodstuff situated on molar is modelled to simulate the mastication force. An orthotropic behaviour is assumed inside the symphyseal area. The results of the simulations show a strong influence of the prosthetic solution type on the stress and strain repartition in the implant and peri-implant bone. This can be explained by the difference of load transfer to bone between those two configurations. Indeed, in the implant-supported prosthesis, the totality of the mastication force is directly transmitted to peri-implant bone whereas the implant-retained solution benefits from a large participation of mucosa to the global load transfer from overdenture to bone.

• Periodical: Materials Science Forum (Volumes 638-642)
• Pages: 518-523
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.638-642.518
• Online since: January 2010
• Authors: Anne Sophie Bonnet, Marwan Daas, Michel Postaire, Paul Lipiński
• Keywords: Biomechanics, Dental Implant, Finite Element Model (FEM)

References

[1] P. Malo, B. Rangert, M. Nobre : Clin. Implant Dent. Relat. Res. Vol 5 (2003), pp.2-9.

[2] G.A. Zarb, C.L. Bolender, G.E. Carlsson : Boucher's Prosthodontic Treatment for Edentulous Patient (St Louis 11th Ed, 1997).

[3] J.H. Koolstra : J. Dent. Res. Vol 82 (2003), pp.672-676.

[4] K. Ogata, M. Satoh : J. Oral Rehabil. Vol 22 (1995), pp.113-119.

[5] M. Daas, G. Dubois, A.S. Bonnet, P. Lipinski, C. Rignon-Bret : Med. Eng. Phys, Vol 30 (2008), pp.218-225.

[6] L.J. Voigt: Wied. Ann. Vol 33 (1889), pp.573-587.

[7] K. Akça, H. Iplikçioglu : J. Oral Rehabil. Vol 29 (2002), pp.350-6.

[8] H.J. Chun, D.N. Park, C.H. Han, S.J. Heo, M.S. Heo, J.Y. Koak : J. Oral Rehabil. Vol 32 (2005), pp.193-205.

DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2004.01407.x

[9] M.C. Castano, U. Zapata, A. Pedroza, J.D. Jaramillo, S. Roldan : Inter. J. Comput. Dent. Vol 5 (2002), pp.87-99. -200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 Mucosa WS Imp NWS Imp Vertical part of contact normal force (N) a b.