Comparative analysis of biomechanical response between zygomatic implant and Facco technique through the three-dimensional finite element method

Background: The placement of zygomatic implants is an alternative used for rehabilitation of edentulous patients with atrophic maxilla. However, the complexity of the various techniques suggested in the literature requires high skill from surgeons. Aim: The objective of this research was to compare the biomechanical performance of traditional technique of zygomatic implant placement in relation to a new proposal, the Facco technique, through finite element analysis. Material and Methods: A three-dimensional geometric model of the maxilla was input into computer-aided design software (Rhinoceros version 4.0 SR8). STL file of the geometric models of implants and components supplied by the company Implacil De Bortoli was converted to volumetric solids through reverse engineering by RhinoResurf software (Rhinoceros version 4.0 SR8). Three groups were modeled: traditional technique, Facco technique without frictional contact and Facco technique with frictional contact, following the recommended position in each technique for implant placement. All models received a maxillary bar. Groups were exported to the computer-aided engineering software ANYSYS 19.2, in step format. Mechanical static structural analysis was requested with occlusal load of 120N. All elements were considered isotropic, homogeneous, and linearly elastic. Contacts were considered ideal and system fixation was considered at the bone tissue base. Results: There is similarity between the techniques. Microdeformation values capable of generating undesirable bone resorption were not observed in both techniques. Highest values in the posterior region of Facco technique were computed at the angle of part B close to the posterior implant. Conclusions: Biomechanical behaviors of the two evaluated zygomatic implant techniques are similar. Prosthetic abutment (pilar Z) modifies the distribution of stresses over the zygomatic implant body. Highest stress peak was found in the pilar Z, but it is within acceptable physiological limits