scholarly journals Stress Analysis of Implant-Supported Removable Partial Denture with Anterior Fixed Prostheses and Conventional Implant-Supported Overdentures in the Edentulous Mandible

2021 ◽  
pp. 232020682110301
Author(s):  
Gulsum Sayin Ozel ◽  
Ozgun Yusuf Ozyilmaz ◽  
Ozgur Inan

Aim: To compare new design implant-supported removable partial dentures retained with anterior fixed prosthesis with a conventional locater and bar attached implant overdenture prostheses retained by two or four implants via photoelastic stress analysis. Materials and Methods: Seven edentulous mandibuler acryclic models prepared and divided into two main groups; two to four implant models, subgroup separation as stated; for two implant models overdenture with locator attachment, crown design retained removable prosthesis with clasp retention, bridge design retained removable prosthesis with clasp retention, bridge design retained removable prosthesis with precision attachment retention; and for four implant models prosthesis with bar attachment overdenture, fixed bridge design retained removable prosthesis with clasp retention, fixed retained removable prosthesis with precision attachment retention. A 300 N load was applied to the first premolars. Photoelastic stress analysis method that is a specific method concerning stress visualization, and does not require statistical analysis, was used. The stress distributions were seen in optically using a poloriscope. Results: In the models with two implant-retained removable partial dentures, the stress distribution was found to be lower than that with the four implant-retained removable partial dentures. Nonsplinted implants caused high stress around the distal implant on the loading side. Conclusion: The stress loads were transmitted to other implants by splinting. Implant-supported removable partial dentures with an anterior fixed prosthetic design show lower stress distributions compared with bar retained prosthesis. These dentures appear to be advantageous in terms of stress transmission.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gulsum Sayin Ozel ◽  
Ozgur Inan ◽  
Ozgun Yusuf Ozyilmaz

Abstract Background: Recently, a new alternative treatment protocols without complex surgical or grafting procedures has become popular in clinical dentistry. A new treatment concept is implant-supported removable partial dentures retained with anterior fixed prosthesis in edentulous mandible. The purpose of this study was to compare this new design implant supported removable partial dentures, with a conventional locater and bar attached implant overdenture prostheses retained by two or four implants via photoelastic stress analysis. Methods: This study was designed to evaluate the force transmission of commercially available titanium implants inserted into edentulous mandibles composed of photoelastic resin within two to four implants using two different types of prosthesis: overdentures and implant-retained removable partial dentures. In all models, implants were placed parallel to each other and the midline. A 300 N load was applied to the first premolars. Loading and stress distributions were photographed after the completion of the prostheses. Results: In the models with two implant-retained removable partial dentures, the stress distribution was found to be lower than that with the four implant-retained removable partial dentures. The locator, a stud attachment, showed the most equitable stress distribution for overdenture models. Despite this, non-splinted implants caused high stresses around the distal implant on the loading side. Conclusions: When models were compared, the stress loads were transmitted to other implants by splinting. Implant-supported removable partial dentures with an anterior fixed prosthetic design may serve as an acceptable and affordable alternative treatment option. These dentures appear to be advantageous in terms of stress transmission considering effects such as ease of use, esthetic requirements, patient requests, and reduction in the area covered by the prosthesis.


2000 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 387-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. M. Ziada ◽  
J. F. Orr ◽  
I. C. Benington

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno Salles Sotto-Maior ◽  
Plinio Mendes Senna ◽  
João Paulo da Silva-Neto ◽  
Mauro Antônio de Arruda Nóbilo ◽  
Altair Antoninha Del Bel Cury

2017 ◽  
Vol 117 (3) ◽  
pp. 373-379 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Gabriella Camacho Presotto ◽  
Cláudia Lopes Brilhante Bhering ◽  
Marcelo Ferraz Mesquita ◽  
Valentim Adelino Ricardo Barão

1980 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 611-617 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harley H. Thayer ◽  
Angelo A. Caputo

1986 ◽  
Vol 29 (255) ◽  
pp. 2784-2788
Author(s):  
Tomoaki TSUJI ◽  
Toshikazu SHIBUYA ◽  
Takashi KOIZUMI

Strain ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-58
Author(s):  
C.D.J. Rushforth ◽  
D.R. Bearn ◽  
J.C. Aird

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document