Orthogonal experimental research on the impacts of mandibular plane angle to the stress distribution of dental implants

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2017.14.010

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: In clinical practice, the selection of dental implants with different specifications is based on the patient’ s mandibular plane angle, and the long-term success rate is different in dental implants with different specifications. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the mandibular plane angle could affect the mandibular stress distribution of dental implants, thus affecting the success rate of dental implantation.
OBJECTIVE: To perform an orthogonal experimental study on the mechanical effects of different implant specifications, mandibular plane angles and mandibular bone densities on stress distribution of the first mandibular molar implants.
METHODS: A L9(3³) orthogonal experiment was designed with 3 three-level factors, including mandibular plane angle (14°, 22°, 34°), implant diameter (6.6, 8.2, 9.6 mm), and mandibular bone density (types II, III, IV). Different dental implants with different combinations were implanted into an alveolar bone model, and placed onto a pressure testing machine under 500 N load. Then, strain (stress) data were collected in real-time and analyzed.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The optimal combination was as follows: low angle; 4.8 mm in diameter; mandibular bone with type II bone density. The relations of all the three factors were the diameter of dental implant > the mandibular plane angle > mandibular bone density. To conclude, the mandibular plane angle has some certain influences on the stability of dental implants. If the biting force is the same, dental implant bears the largest stress under the high angle, subsequently followed by the average angle and the low angle.

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

Key words: Mandible, Dental Implants, Dental Stress Analysis, Tissue Engineering

CLC Number:

R318

Xing Wei-bin, Zheng Shu-xian, Yang Shi-yi, Hou Min-hong. Orthogonal experimental research on the impacts of mandibular plane angle to the stress distribution of dental implants[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2017, 21(14): 2192-2197.

Figures/Tables 6

References

[1]Lekholm U. Surgical considerations and possible shortcomings of host sites. J Prosthet Dent. 1998;79(1):43-48.

[2]Vidyasagar L, Salms G, Apse P, et al. Investigation of Initial Implant Stability with Different Dental Implant Designs. A Pilot Study in Pig Ribs Using Resonance Frequency Analysis. Chinese Journal of Nosocomiology. 2004; 22(18):3996-3998.

[3]方开泰.正交与均匀试验设计[M]. 北京:科学出版社,2001: 85-90.

[4]王晓洁, 罗教明, 杨立, 等.种植体周围骨内应力分布的三维有限元分析[J]. 实用口腔医学杂志, 2005, 21(5): 592-595.

[5]谢峰, 雷小宝, 沈维蕾, 等. 基于ANSYS分析与正交试验法的压力机身轻量化设计[J]. 系统仿真学报, 2008, 20(22):6054- 6057.

[6]曾祥龙. 现代口腔正畸学诊疗手册[M] .北京: 北京医科大学出版社, 2000: 65-66.

[7]张君孝,乔鸣芳. 280例正畸初诊患者下颌平面角观察研究[J].现代口腔医学杂志,2008,22(2):161-163.

[8]宿玉成. 现代口腔种植学[M]. 北京:人民卫生出版社, 2004: 96.

[9]Bondevik O, Espeland L, Stenvik A. Dental arch changes from 22 to 43 years of age: are they different in individuals with high versus low mandibular plane angle. Eur J Orthod. 2015; 37(4):367-372.

[10]Uehara S, Maeda A, Tomonari H, et al. Relationships between the root-crown ratio and the loss of occlusal contact and high mandibular plane angle in patients with open bite. Angle Orthod. 2013;83(1):36-42.

[11]Kurosawa M, Ando K, Goto S. Class II Division 1 malocclusion with a high mandibular plane angle corrected with 2-phase treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;135(2):241-251.

[12]Griffies JM, Meyers CE. Treatment of a Class I bimaxillary protrusive malocclusion with a high mandibular plane angle: An American Board of Orthodontics case report. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000;117(1):60-67.

[13]Frank CA.An American Board of Orthodontics case report: the orthodontic-surgical correction of a Class I malocclusion with high mandibular plane angle, bimaxillary protrusion, and vertical maxillary excess.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993;104(3):285-297.

[14]郭军,张锡忠,关晓航,等.两种方法远移上颌磨牙颅颌面硬软组织变化比较[J].中国美容医学,2013,22(15):1626-1628.

[15]李建军,施生根. 微种植支抗关闭正畸拔牙间隙对下颌垂直向位置的影响[J].中国医药导报,2013,10(12):14-15,18.

[16]曾琳,张蓓,杨狄烽,等.种植体支抗载荷部位对尖牙和磨牙应力分布的影响[J].广东牙病防治,2011,19(11):574-578.

[17]宋元玲,张惠芳,任辉,等.微螺钉种植体在正畸支抗中的稳定性研究[J].中国误诊学杂志,2010,10(15):3529-3531.

[18]宋元玲,张惠芳,任辉[J].微型种植体支抗稳定性的临床研究临床口腔医学杂志,2010,26(7):423-425.

[19]罗宁洁,李自力,伊彪,等.口内入路髁突切除同期正颌术后颞下颌关节结构变化的影像学观察[J].中华口腔医学杂志, 2016,51(6): 350-356.

[20]荆璇,武秀萍.垂直骨面型对正畸诊断治疗的影响[J].中国药物与临床,2016,16(6):833-835.

[21]陈向飒,肖丹娜,高辉.女性骨性Ⅱ类高角患者(牙合)平面与上下颌骨矢状向位置关系的相关性研究[J].口腔医学, 2015,35(5): 379-382.

[22]陈向飒,肖丹娜,高辉.骨性Ⅱ类高角患者(牙合)平面与下颌骨位置的相关性研究[J].天津医科大学学报,2014,20(1):54-56.

[23]王思.上颌前方牵引对恒牙初期不同下颌平面角Ⅲ类错(牙合)的临床疗效评价[J].黑龙江医学,2014,38(9):1058-1059.

[24]罗伟民,杨玉茹.高下颌平面角和低下颌平面角女性患者牙齿移动的观察分析[J].中国美容医学,2010,19(8):1204-1206.

[25]王竞鹏,柳大烈,陈兵,等.下颌角整形术安全平面的解剖学研究[J].中国美容整形外科杂志,2010,21(3):184-186.

[26]张君孝,乔鸣芳.280例正畸初诊患者下颌平面角观察研究[J].现代口腔医学杂志,2008,22(2):161-163.

[27]王春玲,赵艳红,郭杰,等.正畸治疗骨性Ⅲ类错(牙合)对下颌平面角小的成年女性患者颞下颌关节的影响[J].中华口腔医学杂志, 2007,42(8):471-474.

[28]钱文娴,秦天牧.不同下颌平面角患者对Twin-block矫治器的反应[J].口腔医学,2007,27(12):626-628.

[29]石勰,张端强,许游于,等.安氏Ⅱ类Ⅰ分类病例下颌平面角与后牙倾斜度关系的研究[J].福建医药杂志,2003,25(1):50-51.

[30]苏峰梅,张晓真,赵毅,等.上颌无牙颌种植固定修复中种植体位置对应力分布的影响[J].中华老年口腔医学杂志, 2016,14(2): 104-108.

[31]黄美慧,姜闻博,张翕,等.牙种植体表面多孔层厚度对骨界面应力分布的影响[J].口腔材料器械杂志,2016,25(02):61-65,85.

[32]杨炎忠,田小华,周延民.氧化锆角度基台及种植体周骨壁应力分布的有限元分析[J].上海口腔医学,2015,24(4):447-450.

[33]邢维斌,郑淑贤,杨适宜.下颌平面角影响种植体应力分布的有限元分析[J].华西口腔医学杂志,2016,34(0): 502-505.

[34]曾琳,张蓓,杨狄烽,等.种植体支抗载荷部位对尖牙和磨牙应力分布的影响[J].广东牙病防治 2011,19(11):574-578.

[35]王芳,胡敏,李洪,等.种植体支抗辅助快速扩大上颌的三维有限元分析[J].吉林大学学报:医学版,2010,36(4):745-748.

[36]王璐,李任,温黎明,等.正畸治疗伴上中切牙特发性牙根吸收及尖牙阻生1例[J].临床口腔医学杂志,2017,33(1):44-45,46.

[37]胡玉乾,李方研,吕秀梅,等.正畸治疗中拔除第一前磨牙对下颌第三磨牙轴倾度的影响[J].中国现代医生,2016,54(30):55-58.

[38]胡玉乾,孙竹萍,张鹏飞.青少年原发性关节炎患者与正畸患者的颌面形态特点的对比研究[J].中国现代医生,2016,54(28):72-75.