Evaluation of marginal bone loss in implant supported over-dentures: An original research

Haripal Singh; Karthika Janardhan; G. Jeevan Kumar; Mohammed Ibrahim; Damarasingu Rajesh; Atul Aggarwal

doi:10.53730/ijhs.v6nS8.12705

Authors

Haripal Singh
hariranga5@gmail.com
BDS, MDS, Consultant Prosthodontist and Implatologist, Clinic Head, Tishlar Superspeciality Dental Clinic, New Delhi, India
Karthika Janardhan PhD research Scholar, Dept of Periodontics, Narsinhbhai Patel Dental College and Hospital, Sankalchand Patel University, Visnagar, Gujarat
G. Jeevan Kumar Consultant Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeon, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh
Mohammed Ibrahim Assistant Professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of dentistry, King Khalid University, Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Damarasingu Rajesh OMFS, PhD Scholar, Dept of OMFS, Narsinhbhai Patel Dental College and Hospital, Sankalchand Patel University, Visnagar, Gujarat
Atul Aggarwal MDS, Oral-Maxillofacial Surgeon and Implantologist, Senior lecturer, Surendra dental college & research institute, Sri Ganganagar, Rajasthan

Keywords:

dental implants, overdenture, biomechanics, finite element analysis

Abstract

Aim: The purpose of the present research was to assess the marginal bone loss due to stresses encountered in implant supported over-dentures. Methodology: Tridimensional models were built from the images of a computerized tomography of a mandible and 3D laser digitalization of implants, abutments, mucosa, and complete denture. The geometric models of implants and abutments were mounted at the canine region to build reference model 1 - absence of bone resorption. To build the test models the mandible geometric solid was modified to simulate 2-mm vertical bone loss surrounding the implants (model 2) and resorption of the distal ridge (model 3). Finite elements models were generated, and a 100 N static load was applied at the first molar region of each model to compare the von Mises stress distributions in selected points. Results: Von Mises stresses increased on the bone surrounding implants and on the prosthetic components in the model with 2-mm vertical bone loss. The combination of 2-mm vertical bone loss and resorption of the distal ridge did not increase the stresses compared with the model with only bone loss surrounding implants.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Akca K, Cehreli MK. Biomechanical consequences of progressive marginal bone loss around oral implants: a finite element stress analysis. Med Biol Eng Comput 2006;44:527-35.

Blum IR, McCord JF. A clinical investigation of the morphological changes in the posterior mandible when implant-retained overdentures are used. Clin Oral Impl Res 2004;15:700-8.

Calvo-Guirado JL, Gómez-Moreno G, Aguilar-Salvatierra A, Guardia J, Delgado-Ruiz RA, Romanos GE. Marginal bone loss evaluation around immediate non-occlusal microthreaded implants placed in fresh extraction sockets in the maxilla: a 3-year study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2015 Jul;26: 761-7.

Canullo L, Rosa JC, Pinto VS, Francischone CE, Gotz W. Inward-inclined implant platform for the amplified platform-switching concept: 18-month follow-up report of a prospective randomized matched-pair controlled trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012;27:927-34.

Chou CT, Morris HF, Ochi S, Walker L, DesRosiers D. AICRG. Part II: Crestal bone loss associated with the Ankylos implant: loading to 36 months. J Oral Implantol 2004;30:134-43.

Correia A, Piloto P, Campos JC, Vaz M. Finite element analysis of the mechanical behavior of a partially edentulous mandible as a function of cancellous bone density. Rev Odonto Cienc 2009;24:22-27.

Daas M, Dubois G, Bonnet AS, Lipinski P, Rignon-Bret C. A complete finite element model of a mandibular implant-retained overdenture with two implants: Comparison between rigid and resilient attachment configurations. Med Eng Physics 2008;2:1-8.

Gracis S, Michalakis K, Vigolo P, Vult von Steyern P, Zwahlen M, Sailer I. Internal vs. external connections for abutments/reconstructions: a systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2012;23(suppl 6):202-16.

Kolte AP, Kolte RA, Mishra PR. Dimensional influence of interproximal areas on existence of interdental papillae. J Periodontol 2014;85:795-801.

Koo KT, Lee EJ, Kim JY, Seol YJ, Han JS, Kim TI, et al. The effect of internal versus external abutment connection modes on crestal bone changes around dental implants: a radiographic analysis. J Periodontol 2012;83:1104-9.

Penarrocha-Diago MA, Flichy-Fernandez AJ, Alonso-Gonzalez R, Penarrocha-Oltra D, Balaguer-Martinez J, Penarrocha-Diago M. Influence of implant neck design and implant-abutment connection type on peri-implant health. Radiological study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013;24:1192-200.

Pozzi A, Agliardi E, Tallarico M, Barlattani A. Clinical and radiological outcomes of two implants with different prosthetic interfaces and neck configurations: randomized, controlled, split-mouth clinical trial. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2014;16:96-106.

Sjahruddin, H., Nugroho, B. S., Sembiring, T. B., Bangkara, B. A., & Fatmawati, E. (2022). The relevance of public knowledge and the degree of health: Public health literacy study. International Journal of Health Sciences, 6(1), 469–480. https://doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v6n1.4978

Suandayani, N. K. T. ., Sutapa, G. N. ., & Kasmawan, I. G. A. . (2020). Quality control of X-rays with collimator and the beam alignment test tool. International Journal of Physical Sciences and Engineering, 4(3), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.29332/ijpse.v4n3.468

Suryasa, I. W., Rodríguez-Gámez, M., & Koldoris, T. (2021). Get vaccinated when it is your turn and follow the local guidelines. International Journal of Health Sciences, 5(3), x-xv. https://doi.org/10.53730/ijhs.v5n3.2938

Vandeweghe S, De Bruyn H. A within-implant comparison to evaluate the concept of platform switching: a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Oral Implantol 2012;5:253-62.

Watson RM, Jemt T, Chai J, et al. Prosthodontic treatment, patient response, and the need for maintenance of complete implant-supported overdentures: An appraisal of 5 years of prospective study. Int J Prosthodont 1997;10:345–354.