Evaluation of multiple implant-bone parameters on stress characteristics in the mandible under traumatic loading conditions.
OBJECTIVE
The inter-relationships between various implant and bone parameters were evaluated for their influence on the von Mises stress distribution within the mandible using the finite element procedure. The maximum compressive stresses in cancellous and cortical bone were compared to the published stress-strain data to determine bone fracturing status when the maximum (traumatic) loading is applied.


METHODS
Parameters considered herein include the implant diameter and length. Also considered are Young's modulus of cancellous bone and that of cortical bone, along with its thickness. The implant-bone system was modeled using two-dimensional plane strain elements, 50% osseointegration between implant and cancellous bone was assumed, and linear relationships were assumed between the stress value and Young's modulus of both cancellous and cortical bone at any specific point within the mandible.


RESULTS
Implant length was more influential than implant diameter within cancellous bone, whereas implant diameter was more influential in cortical bone. A ranking of all the parameters indicated that the applied masticatory force had a more significant influence on the stress difference, in both cancellous and cortical bone, than all other parameters. Young's modulus of cortical bone and implant length were least influential in cancellous and cortical bone, respectively. Under traumatic loading, cancellous bone fractured for all parameter combinations. When all parameters were set to their average values, the cortical bone did not fracture under traumatic loading. However, it fractured if all the parameters were all set to the minimum values.


CONCLUSIONS
Quantitative evaluation and ranking of the major implant and bone parameters will help provide practical guidelines that are useful for the design and testing of dental implants. The study may also be of interest to dental professionals in evaluating possible implant placement options under various clinical scenarios.
Guan
Hong
H
Structural Engineering and Mechanics, Griffith School of Engineering, Griffith University Gold Coast Campus, Queensland, Australia. h.guan@griffith.edu.au
van Staden
Rudi
R
Loo
Yew-Chaye
YC
Johnson
Newell
N
Ivanovski
Saso
S
Meredith
Neil
N
D001732:Bite Force; D015519:Bone Density; D019245:Compressive Strength; D003758:Dental Implantation, Endosseous; D015921:Dental Implants; D003769:Dental Occlusion, Traumatic / Q000150:complications / Q000503:physiopathology*; D017267:Dental Prosthesis Design; D019232:Dental Restoration Failure; D003799:Dental Stress Analysis / Q000379:methods* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D055119:Elastic Modulus; D020342:Finite Element Analysis; D006801:Humans; D008334:Mandible / Q000503:physiopathology*; D008337:Mandibular Fractures / Q000209:etiology*; D016348:Osseointegration
D015921:Dental Implants