MECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECTS OF IMPLANT POSITION AND ABUTMENT HEIGHT ON IMPLANT-ASSISTED REMOVABLE PARTIAL DENTURES

Main Article Content

Tanu Gupta
Prabhakar Gupta
Surbhai Duggal
Vinay Yadav

Keywords

.

Abstract

Purpose: Dental implants are being used as abutments in implant-assisted removable partial dentures (IARPD) in an increasing number of clinical findings. We evaluated IARPD as a unilateral mandibular distal extension denture using three-dimensional in nature finite element analysis. In particular, the abutment tooth, denture, and tissue supporting the denture were evaluated for mechanical impacts of implant position and abutment height. Methods: The models used for analysis were prosthetically restored first and second molars, as well as the second premolar, on the left side of the mouth. One implant was used for each tooth position. There were two abutment heights: one that was the same as the mucosa and the other that was 2 mm higher. Six different models were built.


Results-Mobility of the abutment tooth was less for implants positioned distally to the abutment tooth than for those positioned medially to the abutment tooth for mucosal-level abutments. The displacement of the abutment tooth was less for implants placed medially to the abutment tooth than for those placed distally to the abutment tooth with raised abutments.


Conclusions: In relation to implant abutment height, the mechanical effects on abutment teeth at the same implant site varied.

Abstract 70 | pdf Downloads 75

References

1. Giffin KM. Solving the distal extension removable partial denture base move- ment dilemma: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 1996;76:347–9.
2. Halterman SM, Rivers JA, Keith JD, Nelson DR. Implant support for removable partial overdentures a case report. Implant Dent 1998;8:74–8.
3. Kuzmanovic DV, Payne AG, Purton DG. Distal implant to modify the Kennedy classification of a removable partial denture: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2004;92:8–11.
4. Ramchandran A, Agrawal KK, Chand P, Ramashanker, Singh RD, Gupta A. Im- plant-assisted removable partial denture: an approach to switch Kennedy class 1 to Kennedy class III. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2016;16:408–11.
5. Bural C, Buzbas B, Ozatik S, Bayraktar G, Emes Y. Distal extension mandibular removable partial denture with implant support. Eur J Dent 2016;10:566–70.
6. Verri FR, Pellizzer EP, Rocha EP, Pereira JA. Influence of length and diameter of implant associated with distal extension removable partial denture. Implant Dent 2007;16:270–80.
7. Memari Y, Geramy A, Fayaz A, Rezvani Habib Abadi S, Mansouri Y. Influence of implant position on stress distribution in implant-assisted distal exten- sion removable partial dentures: a 3D finite element analysis. J Dent(Tehran) 2014;11:523–30.
8. Ortiz-Puigpelat O, Lázaro-Abdulkarim A, de Medrano-Reñé JM, Gargallo-Al- biol J, Cabratosa-Termes J, Hernández-Alfaro F. Influence of implant position in implant-assisted removable partial denture: a three-dimensional finite ele- ment analysis. J Prosthodont 2019;28:e675–81.
9. Dong J, Zhang FY, Wu GH, Zhang W, Yin J. Measurement of Mucosal Thick- ness in Denture-bearing Area of Edentulous Mandible. Chinese Medical J 2015;128:342–7.
10. Promma L, Sakulsak N, Putiwat P, Amarttayakong P, Iamsaard S, Trakulsuk H, et al. Cortical bone thickness of the mandibular canal and implications for bi- lateral sagittal split osteotomy: a cadaveric study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2017;46:572–7.
11. Nucera R, Lo Gludice A, Bellocchio AM, Spinuzza P, Caprioglio A, Perillo L, et al. Bone and cortical bone thickness of mandibular buccal shelf for mini-screw insertion in adults. Angle Orthod 2017;87:745–51.
12. Muhlemann HR. Periodontometry, a method for measuring tooth mobility. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1951;4:1220–33.
13. Stanford JW, Weigel KV, Paffenbarger GC, Sweeney WT. Compressive proper- ties of hard tooth tissues and some restorative materials. J Am Dent Assoc 1960;60:746–56.
14. Parfitt GJ. Measurement of the physiological mobility of individual teeth in an axial direction. J Dent Res 1960;39:608–18.
15. Morris HF, Asgar K. Physical properties and microstructure of four new com- mercial partial denture alloys. J Prosthet Dent 1975;33:36–46.
16. Wills DJ, Manderson RD. Biomechanical aspects of the support of partial den- tures. J Dent 1977;5:310–18.
17. Mente PL, Lewis JL. Experimental method for the measurement of the elastic modulus of trabecular bone tissue. J Orthop Res 1989;7:456–61.
18. Caycik S, Jagger RG. The effect of cross-linking chain length on mechanical properties of a dough-molded poly (methylmethacrylate) resin. Dent Mater 1992;8:153–7.
19. Niinomi M. Mechanical properties of biomedical titanium alloys. Mater Sci Eng 1998;A243:231–6.
20. Goto S, Nakai A, Miyagawa Y, Ogura H. Development of Ag-Pd-Au-Cu alloys for multiple dental applications Part2 Mechanical properties of experimental Ag-Pd-Au-Cu alloys containing Sn or Ga for ceramic-metal restorations. Dent Mater J 2001;20:135–47.
21. Schwartz-Dabney CL, Dechow PC. Variations in cortical material prop- erties throughout the human dentate mandible. Am J Phys Anthropol 2003;120:252–77.
22. Korioth TW, Hannam AG. Deformation of the human mandible during simu- lated tooth clenching. J Dent Res 1994;73:56–66.
23. Grossmann Y, Nissan J, Levin L. Clinical effectiveness of implant-supported re- movable partial dentures: a review of the literature and retrospective case evaluation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009;67:1941–6.