The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 19 , ISSUE 11 ( November, 2018 ) > List of Articles


Evaluation of Stress Distribution Among Two Different Preangled Abutments of Implants in Two Different Densities of Bone at Different Levels Along the Implant–In Vitro Study

Nibha K Singh, Suma B Chalapathy, Roger P Thota, Kiran Chakravarthula, Ramesh Tirnati, Kartheek Yenugupalli

Keywords : Bone density, Finite element analysis, Finite element models, Implant, Pre-angled abutments

Citation Information : Singh NK, Chalapathy SB, Thota RP, Chakravarthula K, Tirnati R, Yenugupalli K. Evaluation of Stress Distribution Among Two Different Preangled Abutments of Implants in Two Different Densities of Bone at Different Levels Along the Implant–In Vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2018; 19 (11):1370-1375.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2434

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 01-06-2018

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2018; The Author(s).


Aim: The present study evaluated the stress distribution among two different pre-angled abutments of implants in two different densities of bone at different levels along the implant. Materials and methods: The stress allocation was assessed and compared between the control group, i.e., 0° and two different pre-angled abutments, i.e., 10° and 20° in two different bone densities as D2 and D3, using the finite element analysis. The geometric configuration of the mandible was generated using Ansys version 14.5graphic pre-processing software. Young's modulus (E) of elasticity and Poisson's ratio (ì) of the material were integrated into the representation. Average vertical load of 150 N was applied on the central fossa and buccal cusp of the mandibular first molar. Highest values of von Mises stresses were observed in different bone densities and angulated abutments at different levels. Results: With increase in the abutment angulation between D2 and D3 densities along implant abutment junction the percentage of stress concentration was maximum with the values being 0.05 %, 108.67% and 128% in 0°,10°, and 20° angulations respectively, whereas, along the implant, the percentage of stress was increased with 0.6 %, 98.55% and 115.6% in 0°,10°, and 20° angulation. Conclusion: Stress concentration was observed maximum at the implant abutment junction irrespective of the angulations and the densities used and the value of stress concentration accumulated within the cortical bone increases with increase in bone density and angulation of the implant. Clinical significance: These finding would aid in recognizing the importance of quality of cortical bone which and helps in avoiding the overloading of the implant abutment interface for the long-term prognosis of the implant.

PDF Share
  1. Rodrigo F. Neiva, Horn-Lay Wang, Jianping Geng. Application of finite element in implant dentistry. Zhejiang University Press, Hangzhou and Springer; 2008.
  2. Misch CE. Contemporary Implant Dentistry. 3rd Edition. USA: Mosby Elsevier Publication; 2008.
  3. Geng JP, Tan KB, Liu GR. Application of finite element analysis in implant dentistry: a review of the literature: J Prosthet Dent 2001; 85(6):585-598.
  4. Saab Jason A, Griggs John M, Powersand Robert L, Engel meier. Effect of abutment angulation on the strain on the bone around an implant in the anterior maxilla: A finite element study: J Prosthet Dent 2007; 97:85-92.
  5. Kallus T, Henry P, Jemt T, Jorneus L. Clinical Evaluation of Angulated Abutments for the Brånemark System: A Pilot Study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1990;5(1):39-45.
  6. Malo P, de Araújo Nobre M, Lopes A, Moss SM, Molina GJ. A longitudinal study of the survival of All-on-4 implants in the mandible with up to 10 years of follow-up. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2011 Mar 1;142(3): 310-320.
  7. Nelson S. Wheeler's Dental Anatomy, Physiology and Occlusion 10th Edition. USA: Saunders Elsevier Publication; 2014.
  8. Sevimay M, Turhan F, Kilicarslan MA, Eskitascioglu G. Threedimensional finite element analysis of the effect of different bone quality on stress distribution in an implant-supported crown: J Prosthet Dent.2005; 93(3):227-234.
  9. Richter EJ. In Vivo Vertical Forces on Implants: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1995 Jan-Feb;10(1):99-108.
  10. Cavallaro J Jr., Greenstein G. Angled Implant Abutments: A Practical Application of available Knowledge. J Am Dent Assoc. 2011; 142:150-158.
  11. Choi KS, Park SH, Lee JH, Jeon YC, Yun YC, Jeong Chang-mo, Stress Distribution on Scalloped Implants with Different- Microthread and Connection Configurations Using Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012;27:29-38.
  12. Clelland NL, Gilat A, McGlumphy EA, Brantley WA. A photoelastic and strain gauge analysis of angled abutments for an implant system: Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1993;8(5):541-548
  13. Tada S, Stegaroiu R, Kitamura E, Miyakawa O, Kusakari H. Influence of Implant Design and Bone Quality on Stress/ Strain Distribution in Bone around Implants: A 3-dimensional Finite Element Analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2003;18: 357–368.
  14. Brosh T, Pilo R, Sudai D. The influence of abutment angulation on strains and stresses along the implant/bone interface: comparison between two experimental techniques: J Prosthet Dent 1998; 79(3): 328-334.
  15. Quaresma SE, Cury PR, Sendyk WR, Sendyk C. A finite element analysis of two different dental implants: stress distribution in the prosthesis, abutment, implant, and supporting J Oral Implantol. 2008;34(1):1-6.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.