Biomechanical analysis of the implants in highly absorbed maxillary sinus district

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2013.20.010

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: The finite element method has been widely used in orthopedic biomechanics analysis by evaluating Max von Mises stress and stress delivery and distribution. However, due to the complex biomechanics environment in the body and significant individual differences, it is difficult to obtain clinical methods based on specific cases.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the biomechanical distribution of implants in the maxillary sinus district.
METHODS: An implant model, 5.5 mm×11.0 mm, located in the second molar of the maxillary was built using Simplant. The distribution of the stress of maxillary sinus district in the conditions of normal occlusion and crossbite under loading of 300 N at 0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, and 90°, respectively, was analyzed using Abaqus finite element software.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: In crossbite condition, the concentration stress of von Mises was evenly distributed in the junction of the neck of dental implant and cortical bone; under the 300 N equivalent loading at 0°, 30°, 45°, 60°, and 90°, Max von Mises stress was 23.43, 52.97, 61.18, 66.15, and 70.53 MPa. In normal occlusion condition, the second stress concentration zone appeared in cortex in addition to the junction of the neck of dental implant and cortical bone, and Max von Mises stress was 30.91, 71.22, 71.62, 77.65, and 73.21 MPa under the 300N equivalent loading at 0°, 30°, 45°, 60° and 90°, about 50% higher compared with crossbite. Finite element analysis demonstrates that it is better to adopt crossbite in highly absorbed maxillary sinus district.

Key words: tissue construction, oral tissue construction, biomechanics, maxillary sinus, implant, second molar, Simplant design, Abaqus finite element, finite element model, occlusion, cortical bone, National Natural Science Foundation of China

CLC Number:

R318

He Yi, Jiang Pei-lin, Geng Jian-ping, Wang Ying, Zhou Jian-qiu, Xu Wei. Biomechanical analysis of the implants in highly absorbed maxillary sinus district [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2013, 17(20): 3679-3686.

Figures/Tables 5

反咬合关系下，皮质骨中应力的分布是由底部分别传向两侧，但左侧(偏颊侧)的分布较为均匀且左侧数值明显高于右侧，最大值也在偏颊侧，并且随角度的增加，最大值也相应变大，见表2。右侧(偏舌侧)的拉应力逐渐衰减至零。应力在种植体中两侧呈明显的弧波形梯度分布，种植体的偏颊侧的应力高于偏舌侧，应力高低情况的分布与加载的角度相一致。应力从种植体两侧的边缘向中央呈梯度状分布，即两边缘向中央处应力由大变小，并在中央处汇集。汇集的应力一端向牙瓷传播，且应力在牙瓷中的分布较为均匀，数值比种植体的应力较小；另一端由种植体上端传向松质骨，分析应力数值分布可以看出得出，松质骨的应力主要是受皮质骨的影响，分布范围与皮质骨相关联。种植体上端的应力并没有传到两侧的松质骨中，而且最顶端的应力没有影响可以忽略不计。正咬合关系下，皮质骨中的分布类似反咬合关系，应力集中在种植体两侧且呈环状梯度分布，在种植体中央处汇集，同时向牙瓷传播。通过计算结果的对比分析可知，反咬合关系比正咬合更容易引起种植体颈部和皮质骨的应力集中，最大应力出现在皮质骨中，见表2。区别于反咬合的是皮质骨颊上侧有第二应力集中区的出现。提示实验在设计种植的咬合位置和角度时需要注意可能出现的生物力学相容性。随着种植体倾斜角度的增大，种植体骨界面综合应力是增大的。这一结果与国外其他学者的研究是类似的[8-9]，同时也表明了骨吸收最先出现在种植体和种植体颈部两侧的体内外实验及临床研究结果是一致的[10-11]。对比两个不同咬合关系的模型，骨组织应力主要集中在种植体周围的皮质骨，由于皮质骨和松质骨的弹性模量值相差10倍左右，故其应力值变化差别也较大。在两个模型相同载荷多角度加载中，皮质骨应力主要集中在种植体颈部周围，并呈弧波环状分布，松质骨应力主要集中在种植体底部与皮骨质相接触的周围，但数值远低于皮质骨内的应力，见图8-12。"

References

[1] ShapurianT,DamoulisPD, Reiser GM, et al. Quantitative evaluation of bone density using the Hounsfield index. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants.2006;21(2):290-297.

[2] Lin CL,Chang SH, Chang WJ, et al. Factorial analysis of variables influencing mechanical characteristics of a single tooth implant placed in the maxilla using finite element analysis and the statistics- based Taguchi method. Eur J Oral Sci. 2007;115(5):408-416

[3] Blatz MB,Strub JR,Glaser R,et al.Use of wide-diameter and standard-diameter implants to replace single molars:Two case presentations.J Prosthodont. 1998;11(5):356-363.

[4] Sun ZY, Cheng G, Zhang ML, et al. Guangdong Yabing Fangzhi.2010;18(1):46-48.孙振宇,陈光,张明睿,等. 大斜度上颌窦底侧方提升同期种植的临床探讨[J].广东牙病防治,2010,18(1):46-48.

[5] Liu Bin，Lu CL,Zhang XY,et al.Yiyong Shengwu Lixue. 2010; 25(1):56-62. 刘斌,鲁成林,张修银,等.黏接剂厚度对IPS Empress II 全瓷冠应力的影响分析[J].医用生物力学,2010,25(1):56-62.

[6] Fan LX,Ding GX, Fei WH,et al.Yiyong Shengwu Lixue. 2012; 27(1):102-107.樊黎霞,丁光兴,费王华,等. 基于CT图像的长管骨有限元材料属性研究及实验验证[J].医用生物力学,2012,27(1):102-107.

[7] Huang YH,Nie EM,Cheng XY, et al. Zhongguo Zuzhi Gongcheng Yu Linchuang Kangfu. 2010;14(39):7263-7267.黄颖荷,聂二民,陈霞云,等. 上颌切牙区3种不同形式种植体固定桥三维有限元模型的建立[J].中国组织工程研究与临床康复, 2010,14(39):7263-7267.

[8] Stegaroiu R, Sato T, Kusakari H, et al. Influence of restoration type on stress distribution in bone around implants: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1998;13(1):82-90.

[9] Lai H, Zhang F, Zhang B, et al. Influence of percentage of osseointegration on stress distribution around dental implants. Chin J Dent Res. 1998;1(3):7-11.

[10] Adell R, Lekholm U, Rockler B, et al. A 15-year study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of the edentulous jaw. Int J Oral Surg. 1981;10(6):387-416.

[11] Quirynen M, Naert I, van Steenberghe D. Fixture design and overload influence marginal bone loss and fixture success in the Brånemark system. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1992;3(3): 104-111.

[12] Wu HP, Jiang XF, You J. Zhongguo Kouqiang Zhongzhixue Zazhi. 2009;14(4):105-108.吴海平,姜献峰,游嘉.牙种植生物力学分析的CAE前处理方法研究[J].中国口腔种植学杂志,2009,14(4):105-108.

[13] Degidi M, Daprile G, Piattelli A. RFA values of implants placed in sinus grafted and nongrafted sites after 6 and 12 months. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2009;11(3):178-182.

[14] Zhang Y,Lei W,Wu ZX,et al. Yiyong Shengwu Lixue.2009; 24(1):50-53.张扬,雷伟,吴子祥,等. 膨胀式松质骨螺钉用于股骨颈骨折内固定的生物力学测试[J].医用生物力学，2009,24(1):50-53.

[1]	Xu Feng, Kang Hui, Wei Tanjun, Xi Jintao. Biomechanical analysis of different fixation methods of pedicle screws for thoracolumbar fracture [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(9): 1313-1317.
[2]	Chen Xinmin, Li Wenbiao, Xiong Kaikai, Xiong Xiaoyan, Zheng Liqin, Li Musheng, Zheng Yongze, Lin Ziling. Type A3.3 femoral intertrochanteric fracture with augmented proximal femoral nail anti-rotation in the elderly: finite element analysis of the optimal amount of bone cement [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(9): 1404-1409.
[3]	Zhou Jihui, Li Xinzhi, Zhou You, Huang Wei, Chen Wenyao. Multiple problems in the selection of implants for patellar fracture [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(9): 1440-1445.
[4]	Liu Yafei, Wang Yalin, Zuo Yanping, Sun Qi, Wei Jing, Zhao Lixia. Structural changes of the temporomandibular joint in adolescents with skeletal Class III malocclusions after maxillary protraction: an X-ray measurement analysis [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(8): 1154-1159.
[5]	Fan Jiabing, Zhang Junmei. Morphological measurement and analysis of the mandible in adult females with different vertical skeletal types [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(8): 1177-1183.
[6]	Xu Yulin, Shen Shi, Zhuo Naiqiang, Yang Huilin, Yang Chao, Li Yang, Zhao Heng, Zhao Lu. Biomechanical comparison of three different plate fixation methods for acetabular posterior column fractures in standing and sitting positions [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(6): 826-830.
[7]	Cai Qunbin, Zou Xia, Hu Jiantao, Chen Xinmin, Zheng Liqin, Huang Peizhen, Lin Ziling, Jiang Ziwei. Relationship between tip-apex distance and stability of intertrochanteric femoral fractures with proximal femoral anti-rotation nail: a finite element analysis [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(6): 831-836.
[8]	Liu Zhengpeng, Wang Yahui, Zhang Yilong, Ming Ying, Sun Zhijie, Sun He. Application of 3D printed interbody fusion cage for cervical spondylosis of spinal cord type: half-year follow-up of recovery of cervical curvature and intervertebral height [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(6): 849-853.
[9]	Wu Gang, Chen Jianwen, Wang Shilong, Duan Xiaoran, Liu Haijun, Dong Jianfeng. Simple HyProCure subtalar stabilization in treatment of adolescent flexible flatfoot combined with painful accessory navicular bone [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(6): 901-905.
[10]	Song Chengjie, Chang Hengrui, Shi Mingxin, Meng Xianzhong. Research progress in biomechanical stability of lateral lumbar interbody fusion [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(6): 923-928.
[11]	Kong Lingbao, Lü Xin. Effect of implant selection and approach on support in the operation of posterolateral tibial plateau fractures [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(6): 942-947.
[12]	Zhang Bin, Sun Lihua, Zhang Junhua, Liu Yusan, Cui Caiyun. A modified flap immediate implant is beneficial to soft tissue reconstruction in maxillary aesthetic area [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(5): 707-712.
[13]	Xie Chongxin, Zhang Lei. Comparison of knee degeneration after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with or without remnant preservation [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(5): 735-740.
[14]	Li Xingping, Xiao Dongqin, Zhao Qiao, Chen Shuo, Bai Yiguang, Liu Kang, Feng Gang, Duan Ke. Preparation and properties of copper-loaded antibacterial functional film on titanium surface [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(4): 553-557.
[15]	Nie Shaobo, Li Jiantao, Sun Jien, Zhao Zhe, Zhao Yanpeng, Zhang Licheng, Tang Peifu. Mechanical stability of medial support nail in treatment of severe osteoporotic intertrochanteric fracture [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(3): 329-333.