Biomechanical analysis of different fixed dental restorations on short implants: a finite element study

Christian Wagner; Samira Herberg; Christoph Bourauel; Helmut Stark; Istabrak Dörsam

doi:10.1515/bmt-2022-0414

Article

Biomechanical analysis of different fixed dental restorations on short implants: a finite element study

Christian Wagner , Samira Herberg , Christoph Bourauel , Helmut Stark and Istabrak Dörsam

Published/Copyright: February 17, 2023

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information

From the journal Biomedical Engineering / Biomedizinische Technik Volume 68 Issue 3

Abstract

Objectives

Although the use of short implants is becoming more common for patients with atrophic alveolar ridges, their use is still quite limited. This is due to the lack of data of long-term survival compared to standard-length implants. The aim of this study was to determine the load in the bone and implant system with different superstructures.

Methods

Three kinds of prosthetic restorations were created on short implants based on CT-Data. Two short implants with different macro-geometries were used. The implants were inserted in idealised posterior lower mandibular segments and afterwards restored with a crown, a double splinted crown, and a bridge.

Results

The analysis was performed under load of 300 N either divided between a mesial and distal point or as a point load on the pontic/mesial crown. The different design of the implant systems had a noticeable influence on the stress in the cortical bone, in the implant system, and the displacement of the superstructure as well.

Conclusions

Compared with implants of standard length, higher stresses were observed, which can lead early failure of the implant during the healing period or a late cervical bone resorption. Precise indications are essential for short implants to avoid the failure of short implants.

Keywords: cortical bone; displacement; finite element analysis; short dental implants; stress

Corresponding author: Istabrak Dörsam, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Preclinical Education and Materials Science, Dental School, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms University University of Bonn, Welschnonnenstr. 17, 53111 Bonn, Germany; and Oral Technology, University of Bonn, Welschnonnenstr. 17, 53111 Bonn, Germany, Phone: +49 228 287 22491, E-mail: istabrak.doersam@uni-bonn.de

Research funding: None declared.
Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
Competing interests: Authors state no conflict of interest.
Informed consent: Informed consent was obtained from all individuals included in this study.
Ethical approval: The local Institutional Review Board deemed the study exempt from review.

References

1. Reich, KM, Huber, CD, Lippnig, WR, Ulm, C, Watzek, G, Tangl, S. Atrophy of the residual alveolar ridge following tooth loss in an historical population. Oral Dis 2011;17:33–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-0825.2010.01699.x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

2. Esposito, M, Barausse, C, Pistilli, R, Sammartino, G, Grandi, G, Felice, P. Short implants versus bone augmentation for placing longer implants in atrophic maxillae: one-year post-loading results of a pilot randomised controlled trial. Eur J Oral Implant 2015;8:257–68.Search in Google Scholar

3. Telleman, G, Raghoebar, GM, Vissink, A, Hartog, Lden, Huddleston Slater, JJR, Meijer, HJA. A systematic review of the prognosis of short (<10 mm) dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient. J Clin Periodontol 2011;38:667–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-051x.2011.01736.x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

4. Himmlová, L, Dostálová, T, Kácovský, A, Konvicková, S. Influence of implant length and diameter on stress distribution: a finite element analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2004;91:20–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2003.08.008.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

5. Lops, D, Bressan, E, Pisoni, G, Cea, N, Corazza, B, Romeo, E. Short implants in partially edentuolous maxillae and mandibles: a 10 to 20 years retrospective evaluation. Int J Paediatr Dent 2013;2013:351793. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/351793.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

6. Renouard, F, Nisand, D. Short implants in the severely resorbed maxilla: a 2-year retrospective clinical study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2005;7:104–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2005.tb00082.x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

7. Papaspyridakos, P, Souza, Ade, Vazouras, K, Gholami, H, Pagni, S, Weber, HP. Survival rates of short dental implants (≤6 mm) compared with implants longer than 6 mm in posterior jaw areas: a meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018;29:8–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.13289.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

8. Torres-Alemany, A, Fernández-Estevan, L, Agustín-Panadero, R, Montiel-Company, JM, Labaig-Rueda, C, Mañes-Ferrer, JF. Clinical behavior of short dental implants: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Med 2020;10:3271. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9103271.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

9. Yu, X, Xu, R, Zhang, Z, Yang, Y, Deng, F. A meta-analysis indicating extra-short implants (≤ 6 mm) as an alternative to longer implants (≥ 8 mm) with bone augmentation. Sci Rep 2021;11:8152. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-87507-1.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

10. Lorenz, J, Blume, M, Korzinskas, T, Ghanaati, S, Sader, RA. Short implants in the posterior maxilla to avoid sinus augmentation procedure: 5-year results from a retrospective cohort study. Int J Clin Implant Dent 2019;5:1–3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-018-0155-1.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

11. Svezia, L, Casotto, F. Short dental implants (6 mm) versus standard dental implants (10 mm) supporting single crowns in the posterior maxilla and/or mandible: 2-year results from a prospective cohort comparative trial. J Oral Maxillofac Res 2018;9:3–4. https://doi.org/10.5037/jomr.2018.9304.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

12. Weerapong, K, Sirimongkolwattana, S, Sastraruji, T, Khongkhunthian, P. Comparative study of immediate loading on short dental implants and conventional dental implants in the posterior mandible: a randomized clinical trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2019;34:141–9. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.6732.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

13. Chatvaratthana, K, Thaworanunta, S, Seriwatanachai, D, Wongsirichat, N. Correlation between the thickness of the crestal and buccolingual cortical bone at varying depths and implant stability quotients. PLoS One 2017;12:e0190293. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190293.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

14. Pierrisnard, L, Renouard, F, Renault, P, Barquins, M. Influence of implant length and bicortical anchorage on implant stress distribution. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2003;5:254–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2003.tb00208.x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

15. Azcarate-Velázquez, F, Castillo-Oyagüe, R, Oliveros-López, L-G, Torres-Lagares, D, Martínez-González, Á-J, Pérez-Velasco, et al.. Influence of bone quality on the mechanical interaction between implant and bone: a finite element analysis. J Dent 2019;88:103–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2019.06.008.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

16. Anitua, E, Piñas, L, Begoña, L, Orive, G. Long-term retrospective evaluation of short implants in the posterior areas: clinical results after 10-12 years. J Clin Periodontol 2014;41:404–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.12222.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

17. Bourauel, C, Aitlahrach, M, Heinemann, F, Hasan, I. Biomechanical finite element analysis of small diameter and short dental implants: extensive study of commercial implants. Biomed Tech 2012;57:21–32. https://doi.org/10.1515/bmt-2011-0047.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

18. Wilhelm, R, Hasan, I, Keilig, L, Heinemann, F, Stark, H, Bourauel, C. Biomechanical investigations of the secondary stability of commercial short dental implants in porcine ribs. Biomed Tech 2014;59:507–13. https://doi.org/10.1515/bmt-2014-0008.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

19. Medikeri, RS, Pereira, MA, Waingade, M, Navale, S. Survival of surface-modified short versus long implants in complete or partially edentulous patients with a follow-up of 1 year or more: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Periodontal Implant Sci 2022;52:261–81. https://doi.org/10.5051/jpis.2007340367.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

20. Smeets, R, Stadlinger, B, Schwarz, F, Beck-Broichsitter, B, Jung, O, Precht, C, et al.. Impact of dental implant surface modifications on osseointegration. BioMed Res Int 2016 Jul 11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6285620 [epub ahead of print].Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

21. Chrcanovic, BR, Albrektsson, T, Wennerberg, A. Smoking and dental implants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2015;43:487–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2015.03.003.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

22. Han, H-J, Kim, S, Han, D-H. Multifactorial evaluation of implant failure: a 19-year retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:303–10. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.2869.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

23. Holahan, CM, Wiens, JL, Weaver, A, Assad, D, Koka, S. Relationship between systemic bone mineral density and local bone quality as effectors of dental implant survival. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2011;13:29–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00206.x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

24. Keenan, JR, Veitz-Keenan, A. The impact of smoking on failure rates, postoperative infection and marginal bone loss of dental implants. Evid Base Dent 2016;17:4–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6401144.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

25. Naseri, R, Yaghini, J, Feizi, A. Levels of smoking and dental implants failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol 2020;47:518–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13257.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

26. Truhlar, RS, Morris, HF, Ochi, S. Implant surface coating and bone quality-related survival outcomes through 36 months post-placement of root-form endosseous dental implants. Ann Periodontol 2000;5:109–8. https://doi.org/10.1902/annals.2000.5.1.109.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

27. Compton, SM, Clark, D, Chan, S, Kuc, I, Wubie, BA, Levin, L. Dental implants in the elderly population: a long-term follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2017;32:164–70. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.5305.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

28. Schimmel, M, Müller, F, Suter, V, Buser, D. Implants for elderly patients. Periodontology 2017;73:228–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12166.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

29. Hagi, D, Deporter, DA, Pilliar, RM, Arenovich, T. A targeted review of study outcomes with short (< or = 7 mm) endosseous dental implants placed in partially edentulous patients. J Periodontol 2004;75:798–804. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2004.75.6.798.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

30. Lemos, CAA, Ferro-Alves, ML, Okamoto, R, Mendonça, MR, Pellizzer, EP. Short dental implants versus standard dental implants placed in the posterior jaws: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent 2016;47:8–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2016.01.005.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

31. Di Fiore, A, Vigolo, P, Sivolella, S, Cavallin, F, Katsoulis, J, Monaco, C, et al.. Influence of crown-to-implant ratio on long-term marginal bone loss around short implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2019;34:992–8. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.7161.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

32. Kim, Y-K, Yun, P-Y, Yi, Y-J, Bae, J-H, Kim, S-B, Ahn, G-J. One-Year prospective study of 7-mm-Long implants in the mandible: installation technique and crown/implant ratio of 1.5 or less. Int J Oral Implant 2015;41:30–5. https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-13-00162.Search in Google Scholar

33. Nunes, M, Almeida, RF, Felino, AC, Malo, P, Araújo Nobre, Mde. The influence of crown-to-implant ratio on short implant marginal bone loss. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2016;31:1156–63. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.4336.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

34. Anitua, E, Piñas, L, Orive, G. Retrospective study of short and extra-short implants placed in posterior regions: influence of crown-to-implant ratio on marginal bone loss. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2017;17:102–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/cid.12073.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

35. Toti, P, Marconcini, S, Enrica, G, Pedretti, G, Barone, A, Covani, U. The influence of prosthesis design on the outcomes of tooth implants immediately placed and loaded by means of one-piece titanium machined restoration. Int J Oral Implant 2018;44:87–93. https://doi.org/10.1563/aaid-joi-d-17-00152.Search in Google Scholar

36. Albrektsson, T, Chrcanovic, B, Östman, P-O, Sennerby, T. Initial and long-term crestal bone responses to modern dental implants. Periodontology 2017;73:41–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/prd.12176.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

37. Geckili, O, Mumcu, E, Bilhan, H. The effect of maximum bite force, implant number, and attachment type on marginal bone loss around implants supporting mandibular overdentures: a retrospective study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012;14:91–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2011.00370.x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

38. Mouhyi, J, Dohan Ehrenfest, DM, Albrektsson, T. The peri-implantitis: implant surfaces, microstructure, and physicochemical aspects. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2012;14:170–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8208.2009.00244.x.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

39. Araki, H, Nakano, T, Ono, S, Yatani, H. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of extra short implants focusing on implant designs and materials. Int J Clin Implant Dent 2020;6:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-019-0202-6.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

40. Ravidà, A, Wang, I-C, Barootchi, S, Askar, H, Tavelli, L, Gargallo-Albiol, et al.. Meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing clinical and patient-reported outcomes between extra-short (≤6 mm) and longer (≥10 mm) implants. J Clin Periodontol 2019;46:118–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13026.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2022-10-23

Accepted: 2023-02-02

Published Online: 2023-02-17

Published in Print: 2023-06-27

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/bmt-2022-0414

Keywords for this article

cortical bone; displacement; finite element analysis; short dental implants; stress