Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Oral Health 1/2023

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Denture | Research

Biomechanical comparison of different framework materials in mandibular overdenture prosthesis supported with implants of different sizes: a finite element analysis

Author: Elifnur Güzelce S

Published in: BMC Oral Health | Issue 1/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The aim of this study is to evaluate the stresses on the supporting bone, implants, and framework materials under masticatory forces in mandibular overdenture prostheses modeled with different framework materials and different implant types, using the Finite Element Analysis (FEA).

Methods

For the finite element modeling, two identical mandibular jaw models were created; one with two standard (diameter:4.1 mm/12 mm length) and the other with two mini-implants (diameter:2.4 mm/12 mm length) were placed in the canine teeth area. The polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) denture was modeled upon them, supported by Cobalt Chromium alloy (CoCr), Poly-ether ether ketone (PEEK), and Zantex materials with framework. No framework was added as a control model; only PMMA overdenture prosthesis was modeled.

Results

Regardless of the framework materials of the overdenture prostheses, the stress values ​​on mini-implants in all models yielded approximately two times higher results comparing to standard implants. More stress transmission was observed in the supporting bone and implants in the control prostheses and overdenture prostheses supported with respectively PEEK, Zantex, CoCr alloy frameworks, respectively. In the framework materials, more stress occurred on CoCr, Zantex and PEEK in that order.

Conclusion

In the light of this study, the use of mini-implants as an alternative to standard implants is not promising in terms of distribution and transmission of chewing stresses. As a framework material, standard rigid metal alloys were found to be more advantageous than polymer materials in terms of stress distribution.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Solberg K, Heinemann F, Pellikaan P, Keilig L, Stark H, Bourauel C, et al. Finite element analysis of different loading conditions for implant-supported overdentures supported by conventional or mini implants. Comput Methods Biomech Engin. 2017;20:770–82.CrossRef Solberg K, Heinemann F, Pellikaan P, Keilig L, Stark H, Bourauel C, et al. Finite element analysis of different loading conditions for implant-supported overdentures supported by conventional or mini implants. Comput Methods Biomech Engin. 2017;20:770–82.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Patil PG, Seow LL, Uddanwadikar R, Ukey PD. Biomechanical behavior of mandibular overdenture retained by two standard implants or 2 mini implants: A 3-dimensional finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;125:138.CrossRef Patil PG, Seow LL, Uddanwadikar R, Ukey PD. Biomechanical behavior of mandibular overdenture retained by two standard implants or 2 mini implants: A 3-dimensional finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;125:138.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Feine JS, Carlsson GE, Awad GA, Chehade A, Duncan WJ, Gizani S, et al. The McGill consensus statement on overdentures. Mandibular two-implant overdentures as first choice standard of care for edentulous patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002;17:601–2.PubMed Feine JS, Carlsson GE, Awad GA, Chehade A, Duncan WJ, Gizani S, et al. The McGill consensus statement on overdentures. Mandibular two-implant overdentures as first choice standard of care for edentulous patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2002;17:601–2.PubMed
4.
go back to reference Chang SH, Huang SR, Huang SF, Lin CL. Mechanical response comparison in an implant overdenture retained by ball attachments on conventional regular and mini dental implants: a finite element analysis. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2016;19:911–21.CrossRefPubMed Chang SH, Huang SR, Huang SF, Lin CL. Mechanical response comparison in an implant overdenture retained by ball attachments on conventional regular and mini dental implants: a finite element analysis. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2016;19:911–21.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Sivaramakrishnan G, Sridharan K. Comparison of patient satisfaction with mini-implant versus standard diameter implant overdentures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Implant Dent. 2017;3:29.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sivaramakrishnan G, Sridharan K. Comparison of patient satisfaction with mini-implant versus standard diameter implant overdentures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Implant Dent. 2017;3:29.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Berger G, de Pereira LF O, Souza EM. A 3D finite element analysis of glass fiber reinforcement designs on the stress of an implant-supported overdenture. J Prosthet Dent 2019;121:–. 2019;121:865. Berger G, de Pereira LF O, Souza EM. A 3D finite element analysis of glass fiber reinforcement designs on the stress of an implant-supported overdenture. J Prosthet Dent 2019;121:–. 2019;121:865.
7.
go back to reference Anehosur GV, Medappa P, Venkitakrishnan VV, Gupta M, Meshramkar RP, Pillai LK, et al. Stress Distribution Analysis at the Bone-Implant Interface Using Four Different Superstructure Materials in an Implant-retained Mandibular Overdenture: A Photoelastic Study. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2019;9:43–6. Anehosur GV, Medappa P, Venkitakrishnan VV, Gupta M, Meshramkar RP, Pillai LK, et al. Stress Distribution Analysis at the Bone-Implant Interface Using Four Different Superstructure Materials in an Implant-retained Mandibular Overdenture: A Photoelastic Study. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2019;9:43–6.
8.
go back to reference Im SM, Huh YH, Cho LR, Park CJ. Comparison of the fracture resistances of glass fiber mesh- and metal meshreinforced maxillary complete denture under dynamic fatigue loading. J Adv Prosthodont. 2017;9:22–30.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Im SM, Huh YH, Cho LR, Park CJ. Comparison of the fracture resistances of glass fiber mesh- and metal meshreinforced maxillary complete denture under dynamic fatigue loading. J Adv Prosthodont. 2017;9:22–30.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
go back to reference Vallittu PK. An overview of development and status of fiber-reinforced composites as dental and medical biomaterials. Acta Biomater Odontol Scand. 2018;4:44–55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Vallittu PK. An overview of development and status of fiber-reinforced composites as dental and medical biomaterials. Acta Biomater Odontol Scand. 2018;4:44–55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Chen X, Mao B, Zhu Z, Yu J, Lu Y, Zhang Q, et al. A three-dimensional finite element analysis of mechanical function for 4 removable partial denture designs with 3 framework materials: CoCr, Ti-6Al-4V alloy and PEEK. Sci Rep. 2019;9:13975.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Chen X, Mao B, Zhu Z, Yu J, Lu Y, Zhang Q, et al. A three-dimensional finite element analysis of mechanical function for 4 removable partial denture designs with 3 framework materials: CoCr, Ti-6Al-4V alloy and PEEK. Sci Rep. 2019;9:13975.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Franco ABG, de Carvalho GAP, Franco AG, Napimoga JTC, Napimoga MH, da Silveira Bueno CE, et al. The biomechanics of the bone and of metal, Zantex and PEEK bars in normal and osteoporotic condition, surrounding implants over protocols: an analysis by the Finite Element Method. Res Soc Dev. 2022;11:e59111226183–e59111226183.CrossRef Franco ABG, de Carvalho GAP, Franco AG, Napimoga JTC, Napimoga MH, da Silveira Bueno CE, et al. The biomechanics of the bone and of metal, Zantex and PEEK bars in normal and osteoporotic condition, surrounding implants over protocols: an analysis by the Finite Element Method. Res Soc Dev. 2022;11:e59111226183–e59111226183.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Neta B, Franco AG, de Carvalho GAP. Flexural strength of milled polymer bars, with and without glass fiber reinforcement. Res Soc Dev. 2022;11:e2711729626–e2711729626.CrossRef Neta B, Franco AG, de Carvalho GAP. Flexural strength of milled polymer bars, with and without glass fiber reinforcement. Res Soc Dev. 2022;11:e2711729626–e2711729626.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Alexakou E, Damanaki M, Zoidis P, Bakiri E, Mouzis N, Smidt G, et al. PEEK high performance polymers: a review of properties and clinical applications in prosthodontics and restorative dentistry. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2019;27:113–21.PubMed Alexakou E, Damanaki M, Zoidis P, Bakiri E, Mouzis N, Smidt G, et al. PEEK high performance polymers: a review of properties and clinical applications in prosthodontics and restorative dentistry. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2019;27:113–21.PubMed
14.
go back to reference Skirbutis G, Dzingutė A, Masiliūnaitė V, Šulcaitė G, Žilinskas J. A review of PEEK polymer’s properties and its use in prosthodontics. Stomatologija. 2017;19:19–23.PubMed Skirbutis G, Dzingutė A, Masiliūnaitė V, Šulcaitė G, Žilinskas J. A review of PEEK polymer’s properties and its use in prosthodontics. Stomatologija. 2017;19:19–23.PubMed
16.
go back to reference Fonseca TGN, Franco AG, de Carvalho GAP. Influence of different surface treatments on the shear strength between acrylic resin and two materials: Polyether Ether Ketone (PEEK) / ZANTEXR. Res Soc Dev. 2022;11:e51811629608–e51811629608.CrossRef Fonseca TGN, Franco AG, de Carvalho GAP. Influence of different surface treatments on the shear strength between acrylic resin and two materials: Polyether Ether Ketone (PEEK) / ZANTEXR. Res Soc Dev. 2022;11:e51811629608–e51811629608.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Amaral CF, Gomes RS, Garcia RCR, Cury AADB. Stress distribution of single-implant–retained overdenture reinforced with a framework: a finite element analysis study. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;119:791–6.CrossRefPubMed Amaral CF, Gomes RS, Garcia RCR, Cury AADB. Stress distribution of single-implant–retained overdenture reinforced with a framework: a finite element analysis study. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;119:791–6.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Pisani MX, Presotto AGC, Mesquita MF, Barão VAR, Kemmoku DT, Cury AADB, et al. Biomechanical behavior of 2-implant- and single-implant-retained mandibular overdentures with conventional or mini implants. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120:421–30.CrossRefPubMed Pisani MX, Presotto AGC, Mesquita MF, Barão VAR, Kemmoku DT, Cury AADB, et al. Biomechanical behavior of 2-implant- and single-implant-retained mandibular overdentures with conventional or mini implants. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;120:421–30.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Radi IAD, Elmahrouky E. Effect of two different soft liners and thicknesses mediating stress transfer for immediately loaded 2-implant supported mandibular overdentures: A finite element analysis study. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116:356–61.CrossRefPubMed Radi IAD, Elmahrouky E. Effect of two different soft liners and thicknesses mediating stress transfer for immediately loaded 2-implant supported mandibular overdentures: A finite element analysis study. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116:356–61.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Lemos CA, Verri FR, Souza Batista VE, Júnior JFS, Mello CC, Pellizzer EP, et al. Complete overdentures retained by mini implants: A systematic review. J Dent. 2017;57:4–13.CrossRefPubMed Lemos CA, Verri FR, Souza Batista VE, Júnior JFS, Mello CC, Pellizzer EP, et al. Complete overdentures retained by mini implants: A systematic review. J Dent. 2017;57:4–13.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference De Souza RF, Ribeiro AB, Della Vecchia MP, Costa L, Cunha TR, Reis AC, et al. Mini vs. standard implants for mandibular overdentures: a randomized trial. J Dent Res. 2015;94:1376–84.CrossRefPubMed De Souza RF, Ribeiro AB, Della Vecchia MP, Costa L, Cunha TR, Reis AC, et al. Mini vs. standard implants for mandibular overdentures: a randomized trial. J Dent Res. 2015;94:1376–84.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Enkling N, Saftig M, Worni A, Mericske-Stern R, Schimmel M, et al. Schimmel Chewing efficiency, bite force and oral health-related quality of life with narrow diameter implants – a prospective clinical study: results after one year. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;28:476–82.CrossRefPubMed Enkling N, Saftig M, Worni A, Mericske-Stern R, Schimmel M, et al. Schimmel Chewing efficiency, bite force and oral health-related quality of life with narrow diameter implants – a prospective clinical study: results after one year. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;28:476–82.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Preoteasa E, Imre M, Preoteasa CT. A 3-year follow-up study of overdentures retained by mini–dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29:1170–6.CrossRefPubMed Preoteasa E, Imre M, Preoteasa CT. A 3-year follow-up study of overdentures retained by mini–dental implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29:1170–6.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Wiskott HW, Nicholls JI, Belser UC. Belser Stress fatigue: basic principles and prosthodontic implications. Int J Prosthodont. 1995;8:105–16.PubMed Wiskott HW, Nicholls JI, Belser UC. Belser Stress fatigue: basic principles and prosthodontic implications. Int J Prosthodont. 1995;8:105–16.PubMed
25.
go back to reference Gonda T, Maeda Y, Walton JN, MacEntee MI. Fracture incidence in mandibular overdentures retained by one or two implants. J Prosthet Dent. 2010;103:178–81.CrossRefPubMed Gonda T, Maeda Y, Walton JN, MacEntee MI. Fracture incidence in mandibular overdentures retained by one or two implants. J Prosthet Dent. 2010;103:178–81.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Rodrigues AH. Metal reinforcement for implant-supported mandibular overdentures. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;83:511–3.CrossRefPubMed Rodrigues AH. Metal reinforcement for implant-supported mandibular overdentures. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;83:511–3.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Rached RN, De Souza EM, Dyer SR, Ferracane JL. Dynamic and static strength of an implant-supported overdenture model reinforced with metal and nonmetal strengtheners. J Prosthet Dent. 2011;106:297–304.CrossRefPubMed Rached RN, De Souza EM, Dyer SR, Ferracane JL. Dynamic and static strength of an implant-supported overdenture model reinforced with metal and nonmetal strengtheners. J Prosthet Dent. 2011;106:297–304.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Gonda T, Dong J, Maeda Y. Stress analysis of an overdenture using the finite element method. Int J Prosthodont. 2013;26:340–2.CrossRefPubMed Gonda T, Dong J, Maeda Y. Stress analysis of an overdenture using the finite element method. Int J Prosthodont. 2013;26:340–2.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Gomes RS, Bergamo ETP, Bordin D, Cury AADB. The substitution of the implant and abutment for their analogs in mechanical studies: In vitro and in silico analysis. Mater Sci Eng C. 2017;75:50–4.CrossRef Gomes RS, Bergamo ETP, Bordin D, Cury AADB. The substitution of the implant and abutment for their analogs in mechanical studies: In vitro and in silico analysis. Mater Sci Eng C. 2017;75:50–4.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Durand LB, Guimarães JB, Monteiro Junior S, Baratieri LN. Effect of ceramic thickness and composite bases on stress distribution of inlays - A finite element analysis. Braz Dent J. 2015;26:146–51.CrossRefPubMed Durand LB, Guimarães JB, Monteiro Junior S, Baratieri LN. Effect of ceramic thickness and composite bases on stress distribution of inlays - A finite element analysis. Braz Dent J. 2015;26:146–51.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Kelkar K, Bhat V, Hegde C. Finite element analysis of the effect of framework materials at the bone–implant interface in the all-on-four implant system. Dent Res J. 2021;18:1–7.CrossRef Kelkar K, Bhat V, Hegde C. Finite element analysis of the effect of framework materials at the bone–implant interface in the all-on-four implant system. Dent Res J. 2021;18:1–7.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Jaros OAL, De Carvalho GAP, Franco ABG, Kreve S, Lopes PAB, Dias SC, et al. Biomechanical behavior of an implant system using polyether ether ketone bar: Finite element analysis. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2018;8:446–50.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jaros OAL, De Carvalho GAP, Franco ABG, Kreve S, Lopes PAB, Dias SC, et al. Biomechanical behavior of an implant system using polyether ether ketone bar: Finite element analysis. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2018;8:446–50.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
33.
go back to reference Sirandoni D, Leal E, Weber B, Noritomi PY, Fuentes R, Borie E. Effect of different framework materials in implant-supported fixed mandibular prostheses: a finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006;34:107–14.CrossRef Sirandoni D, Leal E, Weber B, Noritomi PY, Fuentes R, Borie E. Effect of different framework materials in implant-supported fixed mandibular prostheses: a finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2006;34:107–14.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Kortam SA. Metal versus Poly ether-ether ketone (PEEK) framework reinforcements for maxillary palateless ball retained implant overdentures. One year clinical and radiographic outcomes. Egypt Dent J. 2020;66:1817–28.CrossRef Kortam SA. Metal versus Poly ether-ether ketone (PEEK) framework reinforcements for maxillary palateless ball retained implant overdentures. One year clinical and radiographic outcomes. Egypt Dent J. 2020;66:1817–28.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Zoidis P. Polyetheretherketone overlay prosthesis over high noble ball attachments to overcome base metal sensitivity: a clinical report. J Prosthodont. 2018;27(8):688–93.CrossRefPubMed Zoidis P. Polyetheretherketone overlay prosthesis over high noble ball attachments to overcome base metal sensitivity: a clinical report. J Prosthodont. 2018;27(8):688–93.CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Lee K, Shin S, Lee S, Kim JH, Lee JY. Comparative evaluation of a four-implant-supported polyetherketoneketone framework prosthesis: a three-dimensional finite element analysis based on cone beam computed tomography and computer-aided design. Int J Prosthodont. 2017;30:581–5.CrossRefPubMed Lee K, Shin S, Lee S, Kim JH, Lee JY. Comparative evaluation of a four-implant-supported polyetherketoneketone framework prosthesis: a three-dimensional finite element analysis based on cone beam computed tomography and computer-aided design. Int J Prosthodont. 2017;30:581–5.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Biomechanical comparison of different framework materials in mandibular overdenture prosthesis supported with implants of different sizes: a finite element analysis
Author
Elifnur Güzelce S
Publication date
01-12-2023
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Denture
Published in
BMC Oral Health / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6831
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03080-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

BMC Oral Health 1/2023 Go to the issue