Biomechanical evaluation and optimal design of two parameters of dental implant with arbitrarily adjusted angles

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2014.34.011

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Oversize stress of a dental implant and its surrounding tissue is the main factor to affect the long-term use of dental implants. So, the reasonable and precise design of implant shape is one of the important methods of prolonging the life span of dental implants.

OBJECTIVE: To make the optimal analysis and design of the diameters of connector screw and central screw of the adjustable-angle dental implant invented in the earlier stage.

METHODS: The finite element analysis model of the edentulous mandible with adjustable-angle dental implant was established by software Pro/E 5.0, Mimics 10.0 and ANSYS Workbench 14.5. The maximum equivalent stress of dental implant-edentulous mandibular model was analyzed.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The maximum equivalent stress of dental implant-edentulous mandibular model was much more sensitive to the diameter of connector screw than central screw. The maximum equivalent stress was the least when the diameters of connector screw and central screw were 1.29 and 0.95 mm, respectively, under vertical load as well as when the diameters of connector screw and central screw were 1.45 and 1.09 mm under lateral lingual load, respectively. The results of this research showed that the maximum equivalent stress in the madibular-dental implant-abutment model was more affected by the diameter of connector screw than that of central screw, indicating that more attention should be paid to the choice and design of connector screw.

中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：生物材料；骨生物材料; 口腔生物材料; 纳米材料; 缓释材料; 材料相容性；组织工程

全文链接：

Key words: dental implants, finite element analysis, biomechanics

CLC Number:

R318

Cheng Si-yuan, Wen Hai-lin, Si Jing-qiu, Liang Rui, Nie Jing, Wang Hang, Long Jie, Tang Wei, Wei Yong-tao, Tian Wei-dong. Biomechanical evaluation and optimal design of two parameters of dental implant with arbitrarily adjusted angles [J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2014, 18(34): 5473-5479.

Figures/Tables 3

2.1 种植体-骨组织应力灵敏度曲线灵敏度曲线能直观地显示每个设参数在其整个变化范围内对目标函数的影响权重。本实验通过优化分析得到垂直向力作用下两个参数对最大等效应力的灵敏度曲线分别见图3所示，舌向力作用下两个参数对最大等效应力的灵敏度曲线分别见图4所示。从图中可以看出垂直力作用时，横向连接体螺钉的直径为1.29 mm时种植体最大等效应力最小，直径在 1-1.29 mm之间是随着直径变大种植体-骨组织系统的最大等效应力随之变小，而在1.29-1.45 mm范围内种植体-骨组织系统的最大等效应力是随着螺钉直径的变大而变大。中央螺钉直径的变化对种植体最大等效应力几乎没有影响。而舌向力作用时，横向连接体螺钉的直径为1.45 mm时种植体最大等效应力最小，直径在变化范围内是随着直径变大种植体-骨组织系统的最大等效应力变小，而中央螺钉直径的变化对种植体最大等效应力亦几乎没有影响。综合分析，连接体螺钉直径无论是在垂直向力加载还是水平舌向力加载对种植体生物力学性能的影响均大于中央螺钉直径的影响。 2.2 种植体-骨组织应力情况将优化过后的螺钉直径大小反代入模型中，对该模型进行静力分析得到种植体-骨组织整体、皮质骨、松质骨及种植体各部件的应力分布，垂直向加载见图5及水平舌向加载见图6。通过种植体应力分析结果发现：种植体应力主要集中在基台及连接体上面，垂直向加载时，基台和连接体最大等效应力大部分在90-130 MPa范围内，种植体螺钉上面的最大等效应力大部分在20-45 MPa，种植体与密质骨结合处最大等效应力为12 MPa，种植体与松质骨结合处最大等效应力为1.9 MPa；水平舌向加载时，基台和连接体最大等效应力大部分在200-350 MPa范围内，种植体连接体螺钉上面的最大等效应力大部分在100-160 MPa，而密质骨最大等效应力为 30 MPa，松质骨最大等效应力为2.3 MPa，这是由于种植体与骨组织接触面积相对比较大，使得种植体与骨组织结合处的应力水平低，避免种植体长期服役中应力过大导致的疲劳破坏及骨水平下降。优化设计前后的对比得到：垂直荷载作用下优化前种植体-骨组织系统的最大等效应力是204.75 MPa，优化后的最大等效应力为174.38 MPa，得到最大等效应力降低了14.8%；中松质骨优化前的最大等效应力是 1.89 MPa，优化后的最大等效应力是1.09 MPa，得到松质骨的最大等效应力降低了42.3%，其他部件的最大等效应力都有一定程度的降低。舌向荷载作用下优化前种植体-骨组织系统的最大等效应力是888.2 MPa，优化后的最大等效应力为557.04 MPa，得到最大等效应力降低了37.3%，其中松质骨和皮质骨的最大等效应力都有一定程度的降低。"

References

[1] 田卫东,温海林,汪明祖.一种可任意调节角度的牙种植体系统：中国,201210587180.9[P].2013-05-01
[2] Branemark PI,Zarb GA,Albrektsson T.Tissue-Integrated Prostheses: Osseointegration in Clinical Dentistry.Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co.Inc. 1985.
[3] Covani U1,Ricci M,Bozzolo G.Analysis of the pattern of the alveolar ridge remodeling following single tooth extraction.Clin Oral Implants Res.2011; 22(8):820-825.
[4] Kim DG,Huja SS,Tee BC,et al.Bone ingrowth and initial stability of titanium and porous tantalum dental implants: a pilot canine study.Implant Dent.2013;22(4):399-405.
[5] Ivanov SI,Muraev AA,Fomin MI,et al.Dental implants in complex oral rehabilitation in patients with class III occlusion and partial teeth loss.Stomatologiia (Mosk).2013;92(3):38-42.
[6] Ugurlu F,Y?ld?z C,Sener BC,et al.Rehabilitation of posterior maxilla with zygomatic and dental implant after tumor resection: a case report.Case Rep Dent. 2013;2013:930345.
[7] Revah A,Rehany A,Zalkind M,et al.The tilted posterior tooth. Part III: Abutment for a fixed partial denture.J Prosthet Dent. 1985;54(3):325-330.
[8] Celik G,Uludag B.Photoelastic stress analysis of various retention mechanisms on 3- implant-retained mandibular over dentures.J Prosthet Dent.2007;97(4):229-235.
[9] Tada S,Stegaroiu R,Kitamura E,et al.Influence of implant design and bone quality on stress/strain distribution in bone a-round implants.J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2003;18(3): 357-368.
[10] Juodzbalys G,Sapragoniene M,Wennerberg A,et al.Titanium dental implant surface micromorphology optimization.J Oral Implantol.2007;33(4):177-185.
[11] 李鹏,梁瑞,申龙朵,等.应用Mimics和ANSYS软件建立下颌骨三维有限元模型的方法学研究[J].实用口腔医学杂志, 2012,28(6): 709-713.
[12] 谢敏理,和丽,许纪倩.Pro/E二次开发实现自动装配的一种方法[J].现代机械,2006,33(1):46-48.
[13] Tada S,Stegaroiu R,Kitamura E,et al.Influence of implant design and bone quality on stress /strain distribution in bone around implants: a 3-dimensional finite element analysisInt J Oral Maxillofac Implants.2003;18(3):357-368．
[14] Meyer U,Vollmer D,Christoph B,et al.Bone loading pattern around implants in average and atrophic edentulous maxillae: a finite－element analysis.J Cranio-Maxillofac Surg. 2001; 29(2):100-105．
[15] 高飞,张恩维,魏世成,等.种植体螺纹结构及接触面静力和疲劳分析[J].中国组织工程与临床康复,2010,14(30):5531-5534.
[16] Meijer HJ,Kuiper JH,Starmans FJ,et al.Stress distribution around the dental implants. Influence of superstructure, length of implants, and height of mandible. J Prosthet Dent. 1992;68(1):96-102.
[17] Kao HC,Gung YW,Chung TF,et al.The influence of abutment angulation on micromotion level for immediately loaded dental implants: a 3-D finite element analysis.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants.2008;23(4):623-630.
[18] 谭荣,施斌.封闭介质对粘结固定型种植义齿应力分布的影响[J].口腔医学研究,2004,20(1):22-25.
[19] 冯士刚,艾芊.带精英策略的快速非支配排序遗传算法在多目标无功优化中的应用[J].电工技术学报,2007,22(12):146-151.
[20] 杨周妮,吴作伟,雷铁安.ANSYS优化方法与遗传算法在结构优化方面的比较[J].自动化技术与应用,2004,23(7):4-6.
[21] 范德礼,郑世杰.基于遗传算法和结构优化的多裂纹梁损伤识别[J].江苏航空,2011,31(s1):49-53.
[22] Adell R,Eriksson B,Lekholm U,et al.Long-term follow up study of osseointegrated implants in the treatment of totally eden-tulous jaws.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1990;5(4): 347-359．
[23] Osman RB,Elkhadem AH,Ma S,et al.Titanium versus zirconia implants supporting maxillary overdentures: three-dimensional finite element analysis.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants.2013;28(5):198-208.
[24] I-Chiang C,Shyh-Yuan L,Ming-Chang W,et al.Finite element modelling of implant designs and cortical bone thickness on stress distribution in maxillary type IV bone.Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin.2014;17(5):516-526.
[25] Tada S,Stegaroiu R,Kitamura E,et al.Influence of implant design and bone quality on stress/strain distribution in bone around implants: a 3-dimensional finite element analysis.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants.2003;18(3):357-368.
[26] 沈庆赋,蔡永刚,韩素珍.种植体折断的预防及处理[J].临床口腔医学杂志,2005,21(11):674-675.
[27] 袁会诚,马辅安,刘康民.种植体颈部锥度和末端倒角的生物力学优化分析[J].口腔医学研究,2007,23(5):516-518.
[28] 马清亮,胡昌华,杨青.一种用于多目标优化的混合遗传算法[J].系统仿真学报,2004,16(5):1038-1040.
[29] 王雅莉,伞冰冰,朱召泉.基于遗传算法的飞艇结构多目标优化[J].四川建筑科学研究,2014,40(1):39-43.
[30] 于海莲,王永泉,陈花玲,等.响应面模型与多目标遗传算法相结合的机床立柱参数优化[J].西安交通大学学报,2012,46(11):80-85.
[31] Zarone F,Apicella A,Nicolais L,et al.Mandibular flexure and stress build-up in mandibular full-arch fixed prostheses supported by osseointegrated implants.Clin Oral Implants Res.2003;14:103-114.
[32] 梁瑞,郭维华,温海林,等.12 种不同几何形状的种植体的生物力学分析[J].四川大学学报:工程科学版,2012,55(s2):60-63.