Digital Mathematical Modeling In Predicting The Clinical Effectiveness Of Fixed Prosthetic Restorations On Dental Implants

Kamilla Maratovna Tashpulatova; Lisitsina Aleksandra Yevgenevna

Authors

Kamilla Maratovna Tashpulatova Assistant of the Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Tashkent State Medical University, Tashkent
Lisitsina Aleksandra Yevgenevna Resident of the Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Tashkent State Medical University, Tashkent

Keywords:

mathematical modeling, finite element method, dental implants, fixed prosthetics, biomechanics, digital dentistry

Abstract

The article presents a theoretical rationale for the use of digital mathematical modeling in predicting the biomechanical effectiveness of fixed prosthetic restorations on dental implants. The possibilities of the finite element method (Finite Element Analysis, FEA) in analyzing the stress-strain state of the “implant–abutment–prosthetic restoration–bone tissue” system are considered. The influence of implant diameter and length, bone quality, fixation type, and prosthetic material on the distribution of functional load is analyzed. It is shown that the use of mathematical modeling increases the predictability of clinical outcomes and reduces the risk of biomechanical complications.

References

[1] Kenjayev [1] C. E. Misch, Contemporary Implant Dentistry, 3rd ed. St. Louis, MO, USA: Mosby, 2008.

[2] P. I. Brånemark, G. Zarb, and T. Albrektsson, Tissue-Integrated Prostheses: Osseointegration in Clinical Dentistry. Chicago, IL, USA: Quintessence, 1985.

[3] J. P. Geng, K. B. C. Tan, and G. R. Liu, “Application of finite element analysis in implant dentistry: A review of the literature,” J. Prosthet. Dent., vol. 85, no. 6, pp. 585–598, 2001.

[4] L. Himmlová, T. Dostálová, and A. Kácovský, “Influence of implant length and diameter on stress distribution: A finite element analysis,” J. Prosthet. Dent., vol. 91, no. 1, pp. 20–25, 2004.

[5] M. Sevimay, F. Turhan, M. A. Kılıçarslan, and G. Eskitaşcıoğlu, “Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the effect of different bone quality on stress distribution in an implant-supported crown,” J. Prosthet. Dent., vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 227–234, 2005.

[6] K. J. Anusavice, C. Shen, and H. R. Rawls, Phillips’ Science of Dental Materials, 12th ed. St. Louis, MO, USA: Elsevier, 2013.

[7] G. A. Zarb, C. L. Bolender, and S. E. Eckert, Prosthodontic Treatment for Edentulous Patients, 12th ed. St. Louis, MO, USA: Mosby, 2004.

[8] H. J. Chun et al., “Evaluation of design parameters of osseointegrated dental implants using finite element analysis,” J. Oral Rehabil., vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 565–574, 2002.

[9] M. A. A. Duyck and R. Naert, “Failure of oral implants: Aetiology, symptoms and influencing factors,” Clin. Oral Investig., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 102–114, 1998.

[10] R. G. Craig and J. M. Powers, Restorative Dental Materials, 11th ed. St. Louis, MO, USA: Mosby, 2002.

[11] S. S. Isidor, “Influence of forces on peri-implant bone,” Clin. Oral Implants Res., vol. 17, suppl. 2, pp. 8–18, 2006.

[12] G. H. Wiskott and U. C. Belser, “Lack of integration of smooth titanium surfaces: A working hypothesis based on strains generated in the surrounding bone,” Clin. Oral Implants Res., vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 429–444, 1999.

[13] T. Albrektsson and A. Wennerberg, “Oral implant surfaces: Part 1—Review focusing on topographic and chemical properties of different surfaces and in vivo responses to them,” Int. J. Prosthodont., vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 536–543, 2004.

[14] M. D. Karl and G. I. Taylor, “Effect of material selection on the biomechanical behavior of implant-supported restorations,” Clin. Oral Implants Res., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 334–341, 2012.

[15] S. Natali, P. Pavan, and C. Ruggero, “Evaluation of stress induced in peri-implant bone tissue by misfit in multi-implant prosthesis,” Dent. Mater., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 388–395, 2006.