These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Finite Element Analysis of Implant-Assisted Removable Partial Denture Attachment with Different Matrix Designs During Bilateral Loading.
    Author: Shahmiri R, Das R.
    Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2016; 31(5):e116-27. PubMed ID: 27632278.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of different matrix designs on resilient attachment on an implant-assisted removable partial denture (IARPD) using finite element analysis (FEA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A laser scanner was used to extract the geometrical data of a human partially edentulous mandible. A 12-mm-long and 4.8-mm-diameter-wide implant was modeled, and two types of intradental attachment of snap fastener principle (elliptical) and resilient attachment (titanium) matrices were modeled along with tooth roots and periodontal ligaments. The modeling was performed with a combination of reverse engineering and solid modeling. The model incorporated a removable partial denture and was loaded with realistic bilateral forces. The FEA was used to analyze the stress and strain distributions in the IARPD and in the metal framework. RESULTS: Stresses and deformations in the metal framework and resin denture base surfaces were analyzed for the elliptical and titanium matrix designs. The maximum von Mises stresses were 605.85 and 614.96 MPa in the metal framework surface and 10.35 and 10.63 MPa in the resin denture base surface, respectively, for the elliptical and titanium matrix designs. The maximum deformations (displacements) were 418.5 and 428.3 μm in the metal framework surface for the elliptical and titanium matrix designs, respectively. The corresponding values of displacements for the resin denture base surface were 325.52 and 249.22 μm for the elliptical and titanium matrix designs, respectively. The maximum displacements in the matrixes were, however, nearly the same (229.51 and 229.47 μm) for both the elliptical and titanium matrixes. CONCLUSION: The titanium matrix design was a more favorable design compared with the elliptical design, because it had lower lateral deformation as indicated by the maximum displacement.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]