The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 23 , ISSUE 12 ( December, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Comparison of Stress Distribution in Fixed Partial Prosthesis Restored with Different Combination of Support: A Finite Element Study

Varsha Verma, Puja Hazari, Harsh Mahajan, Naveen S Yadav, Puja Verma, Shweta Narwani

Keywords : Cancellous bone, Composite, Cortical bone, Modulus of elasticity, Stainless steel, Titanium

Citation Information : Verma V, Hazari P, Mahajan H, Yadav NS, Verma P, Narwani S. Comparison of Stress Distribution in Fixed Partial Prosthesis Restored with Different Combination of Support: A Finite Element Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2022; 23 (12):1218-1223.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3446

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 13-04-2023

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Aim: This study was conducted to evaluate the distribution of stress in the bone around the natural tooth, endodontically treated tooth having post and core, and implant as an abutment in different combinations in fixed partial prosthesis using two-dimensional finite element analysis (FEA). Materials and methods: Six models were simulated using ANSYS Modeller19. All six models were divided into 12 zones and 4 lines, and stress values were calculated and compared. The study combinations were – tooth supported fixed partial prosthesis, fixed partial prosthesis having the combination of tooth and post- and core-treated tooth, fixed partial prosthesis with the combination of tooth and implant, fixed partial prosthesis having the combination of implant and post- and core-treated tooth, fixed partial prosthesis with the combination of post- and core-treated tooth on both sides, and fixed partial prosthesis having the combination of implant on both sides. Result: On comparing the stress values, the maximum stress value was observed in fixed partial prosthesis having the combination of implant on both sides (306.2434 MPa) followed by Model 4 (223.1255 MPa), Model 3 (154.3952 MPa), Model 5 (136.9041 MPa), Model 2 (116.2034 MPa), and least stress seen in Model 1 (99.6209 MPa), and minimum in tooth supported fixed partial prosthesis (99.6209 MPa). Conclusion: This study concluded that stress concentration in bone was maximum when the implant was used as an abutment in fixed partial prosthesis. The least stress was seen in bone around the natural tooth due to the dampening effect of the periodontal ligament. Further, the modulus of elasticity of a post acts as a vital parameter in the distribution of stress in post- and core-treated tooth. Clinical significance: The stress concentration in the bone around the abutments affects the longevity of the prosthesis, hence, the clinically appropriate combination of the abutments should be considered for a fixed partial prosthesis.

PDF Share
  1. Field C, Li Q, Li W, et al. Biomechanical response in mandibular bone due to mastication loading on 3-unit fixed partial dentures. J Dent Biomech 2010;902537. DOI: 10.4061/2010/902537.
  2. Creugers NH, Van't Hof MA. An analysis of clinical studies on resin-bonded bridges. J Dent Res 1991;70(2):146–149. DOI: 10.1177/00220345910700021001.
  3. Kerschbaum T, Haastert B, Marinello CP. Risk of debonding in three-unit resin-bonded fixed partial dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1996;75(3):248–253. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-3913(96)90480-1.
  4. Nitin KS, Padmanabhan TV, Kumar VA, et al. A three-dimensional finite element analysis to evaluate stress distribution tooth in tooth implant-supported prosthesis with variations in non-rigid connector design and location. Indian J Dent 2018;29(5):634–640. DOI: 10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_538_16.
  5. Ericsson I, Lekholm U, Brånemark PI, et al. A clinical evaluation of fixed-bridge restorations supported by the combination of teeth and osseointegrated titanium implants. J Clin Periodontol 1986;13(4): 307–312. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-051x.1986.tb02227.x.
  6. Schulte W. The Intra-osseous Al_2O_3 (Frialit) Tuebingen Implant: Developmental Status after 8 Years (1). Quintessence Int. 1984;15:9–26.
  7. Niznick GA. Osseointegration vs fibro-osseous integration. J Oral Implantol 1987;13:10–14. PMID: 3295267.
  8. Lundgren II, Falk H, Laurel1 L. Prerequisites for “stil1” connection between osseointegrated implants and natural teeth (Abstract). J Dent Rrs. 1888;67:34.
  9. Rangert B, Gunne J, Sullivan DY. Mechanical aspects of a Branemark implant connected to a natural tooth: An in vitro study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6(2):177–186. PMID: 1809673.
  10. Misch CE. The Core-Vent implant system, in McKinney RV (ed): Endosteal dental Implants. St Louis: Mosby-Year Book, chapter 10, 1991. pp. 315–321.
  11. van Steenberghe D. A retrospective multicenter evaluation of the survival rate of osseointegrated fixtures supporting fixed partial prostheses in the treatment of partial edentulism. J Prosthet Dent 1989;61(2):217–223. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(89)90378-8.
  12. Naert I, Quirynen M, van Steenberghe D, et al. A Six-year prosthodontic study of 509 consecutively inserted implants for the treatment of partial edentulism. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67(2):236–245. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(92)90461-i.
  13. Sullivan DY. Prosthetic considerations for the utilization of osseointegrated fixtures in the partially edentulous arch. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1986;1(1):39–45. PMID: 3527957.
  14. Astrand P, Borg K, Gunne J, et al. Combination of natural teeth and osseointegrated implants as prosthesis abutments: A 2-year longitudinal study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1991;6(3):305–312. PMID: 1813398.
  15. Kirsch A, Ackermann PJ. Das IR-implant-system. Dtsch Zahnarztl Z. 1986;42:1134–1144.
  16. Romeed SA, Fok SL, Wilson NHF. Finite element analysis of fixed partial denture replacement. J Oral Rehabil 2004;31(12):1208–1217. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2004.01354.x.
  17. De Jager N, Pallav P, Feilzer AJ. Finite element analysis model to simulate the behavior of luting cements during setting. Dent Mater 2005;21(11):1025–1032. DOI: 10.1016/
  18. Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A, Sahafi A. Finite element analysis of stresses in endodontically treated, dowel-restored teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2005;94(4):321–329. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.07.003.
  19. Nelson SJ, Ash MM, Ash MM. Wheeler's Dental Anatomy, Physiology, and Occlusion. Saunders; 2010.
  20. Fathy S M, El-Anwar MI, El-Fallal AA, et al. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of lower molar tooth restored with fully milled and layered zirconia crowns. J Dent Health Oral Disord Ther 2014;1(4): 89–95. DOI: 10.15406/jdhodt.2014.01.00022.
  21. Hassler CR, Rybicki EF, Cummings KD, et al. Quantitation of compressive stress and its effects upon bone remodeling [proceedings]. Bull Hosp Joint Dis 1977;38(2):90–93. PMID: 614875
  22. Rieger MR, Adams WK, Kinzel GL. A finite element survey of eleven endosseous implants. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63(4):457–465. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(90)90238-8.
  23. Laufer BZ, Gross M. Splinting osseointegrated implants and natural teeth in rehabilitation of partially edentulous patients. Part II: Principles and applications. J Oral Rehabil 1998;25(1):69–80. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2842.1998.00583.x.
  24. Pesun IJ, Steflik DE, Parr GR, Hanes PJ. Histologic evaluation of the periodontium of abutment teeth in combination implant/tooth fixed partial denture. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14(3):342–350. PMID: 10379107.
  25. Suansuwan N, Swain MV. New approach for evaluating metal-porcelain interfacial bonding. Int J Prosthodont 1999;12(6):547–552. PMID: 10815609.
  26. Alvarez-Arenal A, Segura-Mori L, Gonzalez-Gonzalez I, et al. Stress distribution in the abutment and retention screw of a single implant supporting a prosthesis with platform switching. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013;28(3):e112–e121. DOI: 10.11607/jomi.2813.
  27. Kumar GA, Kovoor LC, Oommen VM. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the stress distribution around the implant and tooth in tooth implant-supported fixed prosthesis designs. J Dent Implant 2011;1(2):75–79. DOI: 10.4103/0974-6781.91283.
  28. Weinberg LA, Kruger B. Biomechanical considerations when combining tooth-supported and implant-supported prostheses. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1994;78(1):22–27. DOI: 10.1016/0030-4220(94)90112-0.
  29. Zhang G, Yuan H, Chen X, et al. A three-dimensional finite element study on the biomechanical simulation of various structured dental implants and their surrounding bone tissues. Int J Dent 2016;4867402. DOI: 10.1155/2016/4867402.
  30. Menicucci G, Mossolov A, Mozzati M, et al. Tooth-implant connection: Some biomechanical aspects based on finite element analyses. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13(3):334–341. DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0501.2002.130315.x.
  31. Misch CM, Ismail YH. Finite element stress analysis of tooth-to-implant fixed partial denture designs. J Prosthodont 1993;2(2):83–92. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849x.1993.tb00388.x.
  32. Cruz M, Wassall T, Toledo EM, et al. Finite element stress analysis of dental prostheses supported by straight and angled implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24(3):391–403. PMID: 19587860.
  33. Naveau A, Pierrisnard L. Mechanical effects of implant-tooth rigid connection by a fixed partial denture: A 3D finite element analysis. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2009;17(3):98–104. PMID: 19839184.
  34. Lin CL, Wang JC, Chang SH, et al. Evaluation of stress induced by implant type, number of splinted teeth, and variations in periodontal support in tooth-implant-supported fixed partial dentures: A non-linear finite element analysis. J Periodontol 2010;81(1):121–130. DOI: 10.1902/jop.2009.090331.
  35. Jafarian M, Mirhashemi FS, Emadi N. Finite element analysis of stress distribution around a dental implant with different amounts of bone loss: An in vitro study. Dent Med Probl 2019;56(1):27–32. DOI: 10.17219/dmp/102710.
  36. Kaur A, Meena N, Shubhashini N, et al. A comparative study of intra canal stress pattern in endodontically treated teeth with average sized canal diameter and reinforced wide canals with three different post systems using finite element analysis. J Conserv Dent 2010;13(1):28–33. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.62639.
  37. Toksavul S, Zor M, Toman M, et al. Analysis of dentinal stress distribution of maxillary central incisors subjected to various post-and-core applications. Oper Dent 2006;31(1):89–96. DOI: 10.2341/04-192.
  38. Bessone L, Fernandez BE Jr. Evaluation of different post systems: Finite element method. Int J Odontostomat 2010;4(3):229–236. DOI: 10.4067/S0718-381X2010000300004.
  39. Raghavan R, Raj JS, Kunjappan SM, et al. A comparative finite element study of stress and deformation on three commonly used all ceramic fixed denture prosthesis under the influence of different bite forces. Int J Dent Res 2017;5(1):34–38. DOI: 10.14419/ijdr.v5i1.7356.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.