Evaluation of Stress Distribution in Platform Switch Short Dental Placed at Different Depths in D1 bone – An in Vitro 3D FEM Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15379/ijmst.v10i4.2266Keywords:
Eqicrestal, Finite Element Model, Platform Switched Implants, Short Dental Implants, Subcrestal Implants Position, Von Mises Stress, D1 BoneAbstract
Context: FEA has been extensively used in implant dentistry to predict the biomechanical behavior of various dental implant designs, as well as the effect of clinical factors for predicting clinical success. Stress patterns in implant components and surrounding bone are well studied. Objective: To investigate the pattern of stress distribution in terms of equicrestal and subcrestal implant placement at various depths using short platform switching dental implants. Materials and Methods: 3D FEM of the mandibular anterior area was modelled with a uniformly cortical bone of 0.5 mm with an inner core of cancellous bone (FEM) using ANYSIS soft wear. Four implant modes were used with the following dimensions. Model 1. (6x4.6x3.5mm), models 2 (7.5x4.6x3.5mm), 3 (6x5.8x4.5mm), and 4 (7.5x5.8x4.5mm). For a realistic simulation, 100N and 200N of force were applied in axial and oblique directions (0°, 15°, and 30°, respectively). At different depths, both cancellous and cortical bone is evaluated for von Mises stress. Ten-noded tetrahedron components with three degrees of freedom per node are used to interpret translations on the x, y, and z axes. Results: Based on bone shape, force direction, and depth of implant placement, each of the five positions of platform-switched short osseointegrated implants examined by FEM simulations had a unique stress-based biomechanical behavior. Conclusions: Axial forces were less harmful than oblique forces. The cortical and cancellous bone experienced less stress because of the implantation of subcrestal implants. According to recent research, platform-switched short subcrestal implant models result in improved stress distribution around peri implant areas in D1 bone and the conservation of marginal bone loss.