Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Print this page Email this page Users Online: 1099
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 8  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 95-100

Stress distribution in implant supported mandibular ovedentures and surrounding bone using three different types of attachments – a 3D finite element analysis


1 Department of Prosthodontics, Sri Balaji Dental College, Moinabad, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
2 Department of Conservative and Endodontics, Sri Balaji Dental College, Moinabad, Hyderabad, Telangana, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Kummari Subash Chander
Sri Balaji Dental College, Yenkapally, Moinabad, Hyderabad - 500 075, Telangana
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/JDRNTRUHS.JDRNTRUHS_42_19

Rights and Permissions

Background: Since mandibular complete denture faces problems with retention, stability, support mandibular implant supported overdenture is a more successful and durable treatment option. Different types of attachments used with mandibular overdentures improve the retention and dissipate stress as well. It is of paramount importance for the success of the prosthesis. Finite element analysis (FEA) is a very precise method for stress assessment in the bone. Materials and Methods: Mandibular 2 implant supported overdenture was considered. Noble Biocare replace implant of diameter 4.3 mm, length 11.5 mm was used in the study. 3 models were considered: Model A – Implant overdenture with Ball/O-ring attachment, Model B – Implant overdenture with Locator Attachment, Model C – Implant overdenture with Ceka attachment. A detailed, precise 3D solid model of human mandible was obtained upon which FEA could be optimized using Autodesk NETFABB ver. 8.1, a software and MAYA 3D software tool. These models were subjected to vertical, oblique and horizontal forces of 35N, 70N and 10N, respectively. Stress was assessed at different sites namely silicon cap/ring, abutment, implant–abutment interface, implant body, surrounding bone. The amount of force required to uplift the dentures was assessed. Results and Conclusion: Results showed that locator attachment showed least amount of stress generation under all three types of loads. Within the limitations of the study, it was concluded that locator attachment was better in terms of stress generation in comparison to Ball and Ceka attachment. It was the most retentive attachment in comparison to the other two attachments.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed58    
    Printed9    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded17    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal