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: The effect of different abutment and restorative crown materials on stress distribution in single-unit implant-supported restorations: A 3D finite element stress analysis.
    Author: Gökçimen G, Durkan R, Deste Gökay G, Oyar P.
    Journal: J Prosthodont; 2024 Jun; 33(5):497-505. PubMed ID: 37434476.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of restorative materials with or without resin content, modeled on zirconia and titanium abutment materials, on the stress distribution on the alveolar bone, implant, and prosthetic crowns with a 3D finite element stress analysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Titanium and zirconia abutments were combined with three implant-supported crown materials (polymer infiltrated hybrid ceramic (PICN), lithium disilicate (LD), and zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate (ZLS)) to create six experimental groups. The 40 × 30 × 20 mm alveolar bone, 3.75 × 10 mm implant, esthetic abutment, and maxillary first premolar crown bonded over the abutment were the components of the finite element models. On the lingual cusp of the crown, the 150 N occlusal loading was applied in the buccolingual direction at a 30° angle. Equivalent von Mises stress and maximum and minimum principal stresses were used for both the qualitative and quantitative evaluation of the stress distribution of the created models. RESULTS: The von Mises stress in implant and abutment did not differ according to the crown materials. The use of a zirconia abutment resulted in higher von Mises stress values in the abutment but lower stress values in the implant. The highest stress values were obtained in ZLS (196.65 MPa) and LD (194.05 MPa) crowns. The use of titanium abutments, regardless of crown materials, resulted in higher von Mises stress values in restorative crowns than in zirconia abutments. The principal stress values in alveolar bone showed similar distribution and concentration in all models. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in crown material did not affect stress distribution in the implant and peripheral bone. However, the zirconia esthetic abutment resulted in a lower stress concentration on the implant.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]