Share Page:

Volume 27 , Issue 5
September/October 2012

Pages e77e84

Stress Distribution and Micromotion Analyses of Immediately Loaded Implants of Varying Lengths in the Mandible and Fibular Bone Grafts: A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis

Jacqueline Chia-Hsuan Wu, BDSc, MDSc/Chen-Sheng Chen, PhD/Shing-Wai Yip, DDS, MS/Ming-Lun Hsu, DDS, Dr Med Dent

PMID: 23057046

Purpose: The aim of the present study was to compare the biomechanical effects of different lengths of implants in an immediate loading condition in mandibular and fibular bone. Three-dimensional (3D) nonlinear finite element analysis (FEA) was used to examine the complex irregular structures. The variables of this research were the two different bone types (mandible and fibula) and three different implant lengths. Materials and Methods: Simplified half models were constructed for 3D FEA. Three different implant lengths (6 mm, 10 mm, and 15 mm) were inserted into the mandibular and fibular bone models, which were made to simulate immediate implant loading conditions. A load of 125 N was applied to the center of the suprastructure at a 45-degree angle relative to the long axis of the implant, and the resultant maximum von Mises equivalent (EQV) stresses, stress distribution, strain energy, and micromotion were measured. Results: In the mandible, the maximum EQV stresses were 115.636 MPa, 155.943 MPa, and 157.105 MPa with the 6-mm, 10-mm, and 15-mm implants, respectively. The mean EQV stresses were 64.145 MPa, 77.925 MPa, and 78.500 MPa, respectively. In the fibula, the maximum EQV stresses were 174.04 MPa, 157.456 MPa, and 144.353 MPa with the 6-mm, 10-mm, and 15-mm implants, respectively. The mean EQV stresses were 82.329 MPa, 73.526 MPa, and 74.050 MPa, respectively. Conclusion: The micromotion in the fibula models was lower than that seen in the mandible models. EQV stress in the fibular bone was different from that in the mandible. Short implants can be an option for oral rehabilitation in the mandible; however, implants in the fibula should probably have bicortical engagement. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012;27:e77e84

Full Text PDF File | Order Article


Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.


© 2018 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc JOMI Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Author Guidelines
Submission Form
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us