Influência do número e inclinação dos implantes para a ancoragem de prótese fixa em maxila atrófica: estudo comparativo com elementos finitos 3D
Carregando...
Data
2012-03-27
Autores
Almeida, Erika Oliveira de [UNESP]
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Resumo
Proposição. O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar o comportamento biomecânico de prótese fixa implanto-suportada com implantes longos angulados e implantes curtos retos posicionados na região mais posterior de maxila moderadamente atrófica. As hipóteses foram de que a presença do implante distal longo inclinado (all-on-four) e do implante distal curto reto (all-on-six) resultariam em maior (hipótese-1) e menor (hipótese-2) tensão no osso maxilar quando comparada a presença dos implantes distais longos verticais (all-on-four). Materiais e Métodos. O modelo 3D foi confeccionado baseado na tomografia de um paciente com maxila atrófica e na micro-tomografia dos implantes Nobel Biocare. As diferentes configurações foram: M4R, quatro implantes verticais anteriores (4X11.5 X 4X13mm); M4I, dois implantes verticais mesiais (4X11.5mm) e dois implantes inclinados distais (45°) (4X13mm); M6R, quatro implantes verticais anteriores (4X11.5 X 4X13mm) + dois implantes curtos verticais posteriores (5X7mm). Foram aplicados carregamentos bilaterais simultâneos (150N) axial (C1) e obliquo (C2) na região de cantilever posterior. Foi adotada a Tensão Principal Máxima (σmax) para avaliação da tensão óssea e a tensão Equivalente de von Mises (σvM) para avaliação dos implantes. Resultados. Independente da direção do carregamento, a σmax foi maior no M4I (C1 0,87 e C2 0,85 GPa), seguido pelo M6R (C1 0,71 e C2 0,53 GPa) e M4R (C1 0,59 e C2 0,44 GPa). Os implantes mais próximos da área de carregamento apresentaram os maiores valores de tensão no planejamento M6R, seguido pelo M4I e M4R. Conclusões. As hipóteses 1 e 2 foram respectivamente aceita e parcialmente negada, uma vez que a presença do implante distal longo inclinado e do...
Purpose. This study compared the biomechanical behavior of tilted long implant and vertical short implants to support fixed prosthesis in an atrophic maxilla. The hypotheses were that the presence of distal tilted (all-on-four) and distal short implants (all-on-six) would respectively result in higher (Hypotheses 1) and lower (Hypotheses) stresses in the maxillary bone in comparison to the presence of vertical implants (all-on-four). Materials and Methods. The maxilla model was built based on a tomographic image of the patient. Implant models were based on micro-CT imaging of implants. The different configurations considered were: M4S, four vertical anterior implants; M4T, two mesial vertical implants and two distal tilted (45°) implants in the anterior region of the maxilla; and M6S, four vertical anterior implants and two vertical posterior implants. Numerical simulation was carried out under bilateral 150N loads applied in the cantilever region in axial (L1) and oblique (45°) (L2) direction. Maximum principal stress (σmax) and von Mises stress (σvM) were utilized for bone and implant stresses assessments, respectively. Results. Regardless of loading direction, bone σmax was highest for the M4T (L1 0.87 and L2 0.85 GPa), followed by M6S (L1 0.71 and L2 0.53 GPa) and M4S (L1 0.59 and L2 0.44 GPa). Implants in proximity of the loading area presented highest stress values in the M6S configuration, followed by the M4T and then the M4S. Conclusions. The hypotheses of the present study were that the presence of distal tilted (all-on-four) and distal short implants (all-on-six) would respectively result in higher and lower stresses in the maxillary bone in comparison to the presence of vertical implants (all-on-four), were respectively accepted and... (Complete abstract click electronic access below)
Purpose. This study compared the biomechanical behavior of tilted long implant and vertical short implants to support fixed prosthesis in an atrophic maxilla. The hypotheses were that the presence of distal tilted (all-on-four) and distal short implants (all-on-six) would respectively result in higher (Hypotheses 1) and lower (Hypotheses) stresses in the maxillary bone in comparison to the presence of vertical implants (all-on-four). Materials and Methods. The maxilla model was built based on a tomographic image of the patient. Implant models were based on micro-CT imaging of implants. The different configurations considered were: M4S, four vertical anterior implants; M4T, two mesial vertical implants and two distal tilted (45°) implants in the anterior region of the maxilla; and M6S, four vertical anterior implants and two vertical posterior implants. Numerical simulation was carried out under bilateral 150N loads applied in the cantilever region in axial (L1) and oblique (45°) (L2) direction. Maximum principal stress (σmax) and von Mises stress (σvM) were utilized for bone and implant stresses assessments, respectively. Results. Regardless of loading direction, bone σmax was highest for the M4T (L1 0.87 and L2 0.85 GPa), followed by M6S (L1 0.71 and L2 0.53 GPa) and M4S (L1 0.59 and L2 0.44 GPa). Implants in proximity of the loading area presented highest stress values in the M6S configuration, followed by the M4T and then the M4S. Conclusions. The hypotheses of the present study were that the presence of distal tilted (all-on-four) and distal short implants (all-on-six) would respectively result in higher and lower stresses in the maxillary bone in comparison to the presence of vertical implants (all-on-four), were respectively accepted and... (Complete abstract click electronic access below)
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Método dos elementos finitos, Implantes dentários, Osseointegração, Biomecânica, Atrophic maxilla - Fixed prosthesis
Como citar
ALMEIDA, Erika Oliveira de. Influência do número e inclinação dos implantes para a ancoragem de prótese fixa em maxila atrófica: estudo comparativo com elementos finitos 3D. 2012. 70 f. Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho, Faculdade de Odontologia de Araçatuba, 2012.