Indian Journal of Dental ResearchIndian Journal of Dental ResearchIndian Journal of Dental Research
HOME | ABOUT US | EDITORIAL BOARD | AHEAD OF PRINT | CURRENT ISSUE | ARCHIVES | INSTRUCTIONS | SUBSCRIBE | ADVERTISE | CONTACT
Indian Journal of Dental Research   Login   |  Users online:

Home Bookmark this page Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font size Increase font size         

 


 
ORIGINAL RESEARCH Table of Contents   
Year : 2009  |  Volume : 20  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 31-36
A comparison of stress distribution and flexion among various designs of bar attachments for implant overdentures: A three dimensional finite element analysis


1 Department of Prosthodontics, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal, Karnataka - 576 119, India
2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Manipal Institute of Technology, MAHE University, Manipal, Karnataka - 576 119, India

Correspondence Address:
Vijay Prakash
Department of Prosthodontics, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal, Karnataka - 576 119
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.49058

Rights and Permissions

Context: Bar overdentures are popular choices among clinicians worldwide but configurations that provide an optimal biomechanical distribution of stress are still debatable. Aims: To compare the stresses and elastic flexion between implant supported bar overdentures in various configurations using finite element analysis. Settings and Design: A CAT scan of a human mandible was used to generate an anatomically accurate mechanical model. Materials and Methods: Three models with bars and clips in three different configurations were constructed. Model 1 had a single bar connecting two implants, Model 2 had three bars connecting all the four implants, and Model 3 had two bars connecting the medial and distal implants on the sides only. The models were loaded under static conditions with 100N load distributed at the approximate position of the clip. The mandibular boundary conditions were modeled considering the real geometry of its muscle supporting system. Maximum von Mises stress at the level of the bar and at the bone implant interface were compared in all three models. The flexion of mandible and the bar was also compared qualitatively. Statistical Analysis Used: The analyses were accomplished using the ANSYS software program and were processed by a personal computer. Stress on these models was analyzed after loading conditions. Results: Qualitative comparisons showed that stress at the level of the bar and at the bone implant interface were in the following order: Model 1> Model 3> Model 2. The flexion of the mandible and the bar were in the following order: Model 2 > Model 1 > Model 3. Conclusions: Four implant bar systems connected by bars on the sides only is a better choice than two implant bar systems and four implant bar systems with bars connecting all four implants.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article

 
 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
  Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
  Reader Comments
  Email Alert *
  Add to My List *
 
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed9739    
    Printed445    
    Emailed11    
    PDF Downloaded859    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 21    

Recommend this journal