Home Subscription Services
 
 
Loading
NEW
Sign Up to Receive Quintessence Updates by Email
 

 
The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry
JAD Home Page
About the Editor
Editorial Board
Submit
Author Guidelines
Submission Form
Reprints / Articles
Permissions
Advertising
Advertising
MEDLINE Search
 
 
 
 
 
FacebookTwitterYouTubeRSS
Quintessence Publishing: Journals: JAD

 

The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry

Edited by Jean-François Roulet

ISSN (print) 1461-5185 • ISSN (online) 1757-9988

Publication:

September/October 2008
Volume 10 , Issue 5

Pages: 365-371
Back
Share Abstract:

Three-dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Metal and FRC Adhesive Fixed Dental Prostheses

Shinya, Akikazu / Yokoyama, Daiichiro / Lassila, Lippo V. J. / Shinya, Akiyoshi / Vallittu, Pekka K.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate stress distribution in anterior adhesive fixed dental prostheses (FDP) and at the tooth/framework interface. Metal (M-FDP) and glass fiber-reinforced composite (FRC-FDP) frameworks were compared. Materials and Methods: The design of the FDP consisted of retainers on a maxillary central incisor and canine with a pontic of a lateral incisor. Two different framework materials were compared: isotropic Au-Pd alloy and anisotropic continuous unidirectional E-glass FRC. Veneers in both cases were made of isotropic veneering hybrid composite. A 3- dimensional finite element model of a 3-unit FDP loaded with 154 N (at a 45-degree angle to the incisal edge of the pontic) was used to analyze stress distribution in the FDP and at the adhesive interface. A finite element analysis was used in calculation of the maximum principal stress and displacement. Results: The maximum displacement of FRC-FDP was higher than that of M-FDP. Stress concentrations were located equally in the connectors and at the occluding contact points in both framework types. Maximum principal stress of FRC-FDP was lower than that of M-FDP. Stress analysis further indicated that the maximum stress in the luting cement interface of FRC-FDP was located at the middle part of the retainers, whereas in the M-FDP, the maximum stress was located at the marginal edge of the retainers. Conclusion: The FE model revealed differences in displacement and stress distribution between metal and FRC frameworks of FDP. The general observation was that FRC-FDP provided more even stress distribution from the occluding contact point to the cement interface than did M-FDP.

Keywords: adhesive fixed dental prostheses, fiber reinforced composites, cement interface, finite element analysis, hybrid composite, prosthetic dentistry

Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
  © 2013 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc
 

Home | Subscription Services | Books | Journals | Multimedia | Events | Blog
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | Advertising | Help | Sitemap | Catalog