Impact of annual bone loss and different bone quality on dental implant success - A finite element study
Impact of annual bone loss and different bone quality on dental implant success - A finite element study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.compbiomed.2017.09.016
复制
发表时间：
2017-12-01
影响因子：
7.7
通讯作者：
Yefremov, Oleg
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Linetskiy, Igor;Demenko, Vladyslav;Yefremov, Oleg
背景：为了牙种植体的成功，实验建立的阈值应限制骨应力和应变。根据这些指标，可以计算出决定植入物承载能力的极限功能载荷。显然，由于骨丢失导致的骨密度降低缩短了种植体的使用寿命。比较骨丢失如何影响各种种植体的最终功能载荷，可以为临床医生提供关于种植体适用性和寿命的有意义的反馈。本研究的目的是评估不同的牙种植体放置在I-IV骨类型的基础上，其极限功能负荷的比较与骨lossfactor.Method：Von Mises应力和第一主应变分布在骨种植体界面进行了研究，并计算极限功能负荷。设计I-IV骨型模型。3.3 x 8.0 mm（A）、4.1 x 12.0 mm（B）和4.8 x 14.0 mm（C）种植体在10个骨丢失节段进行分析。极限功能负荷，产生的最终冯米塞斯应力和第一主应变在bone，calculated.Results：为种植体A，B，和C放置在I型骨，极限功能负荷值均高于120.92 N的实验功能负荷，这对应于10+，10+，和10 +年的服务与0.2毫米的年骨损失。对于II型骨，寿命为4年、10年以上和10年以上。对于III型骨，寿命为4、5和5年。对于IV型骨，第一主应变最初是有害的所有implants.Conclusions：在口腔种植，骨丢失是一个重要因素，种植体寿命预后。临床医生在评价种植体承载能力时，应考虑种植体寿命缩短的因素。
Background: For dental implant success, experimentally established thresholds should limit bone stresses and strains. From these metrics, the ultimate functional load, which determines the implant load-carrying capacity, can be calculated. Obviously, its decrease due to bone loss shortens implant service life. A comparison of how bone loss affects the ultimate functional loads of various implants can provide the clinician with meaningful feedback concerning the suitability and longevity of implants. The aim of this study is to evaluate the lifetime of different dental implants placed in I-IV bone types on the basis of a comparison of their ultimate functional loads with consideration of the bone loss factor.Method: Von Mises stress and first principal strain distributions in bone-implant interface were studied and ultimate functional loads were calculated. Models of I-IV bone types were designed. 3.3 x 8.0 mm (A), 4.1 x 12.0 mm (B) and 4.8 x 14.0 mm (C) implants were analyzed at 10 levels of bone loss. Ultimate functional loads, which generated the ultimate von Mises stress and first principal strain in bone, were computed.Results: For the implants A, B, and C placed in type I bone, ultimate functional load values were above 120.92 N experimental functional load, which corresponded to 10+, 10+, and 10 + years of service with 0.2 mm annual bone loss. For type II bone, the lifetime was 4, 10+, and 10 + years. For type III bone, the lifetime was 4, 5, and 5 years. For type IV bone, first principal strains were initially deleterious for all implants.Conclusions: In oral implantology, bone loss is an essential factor for implant longevity prognosis. While evaluating implant load-carrying capacity, clinicians should take into account the factor of implant longevity decrease.