Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research ›› 2010, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (13): 2311-2314.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-8225.2010.13.009

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Finite element analysis of stress distribution of Spline implant-abutment joint with different number of projections

Huang Qian1, Li Su-ling1, Wang Cong2, Wang Shao-an3, Wang Lu1   

  1. 1 Department of Prosthodontics, Stomatology Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing   400015, China; 2 Department of Stomatology, Chengdu Third People’s Hospital, Chengdu   610000, Sichuan Province, China; 3 West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu   610000, Sichuan Province, China
  • Online:2010-03-26 Published:2010-03-26
  • Contact: Li Su-ling, Master, Attending physician, Department of Prosthodontics, Stomatology Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing 400015, China 28905594@qq.com
  • About author:Huang Qian★, Master, Attending physician, Department of Prosthodontics, Stomatology Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing 400015, China 13874423@qq.com
  • Supported by:

    the Medical Science and Technology Development Program of Chongqing, No. 2008-2-242*

PDF

298

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Spline implant has been shown to have maximum stress at Spline projection root under different loading.
OBJECTIVE: To find a way to strengthen the Spline projections from projection numbers, namely to reduce projection number but increase projection volume, and to verify the accuracy by three-dimensional finite element analysis.
METHODS: Pro/Engineer Wildfire 2.0 software was used to establish Spline implant-abutment model with identical diameter and length but different projection numbers (4, 5, 6). The model interface was modified by two methods: by method A, the total volume of 4 or 5 projections was equal to Spline implant; by method B, the projection space of 4 or 5 projections was equal to Spline implant. Three-dimensional finite element analysis was used to determine stress distribution of the implant with different number of projections under vertical 200, 500 N, oblique 100 N (45°) by Ansys Workbench 9.0 software.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: For method A, stress on projections of the implant increased with reducing number of projections. For method B, implant with 5 projections displayed greater stress compared with 6 projections, and 4 projections showed similar or a little lower stress compared with implant with 6 projections. Results show that it requires validation to strengthen the Spline projections by reducing projection numbers.

CLC Number: