Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · European Journal of General Dentistry 2022; 11(01): 023-031
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1744362
Original Article

Implant-Supported Restoration with Straight and Angled Hybrid Abutments: Digital Image Correlation and 3D-Finite Element Analysis

Amir Mohidin Demachkia
1   Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University (UNSEP), São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Luigi Giovanni Bernardo Sichi
1   Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University (UNSEP), São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Jonas Vinicius Meireles Rodrigues 
1   Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University (UNSEP), São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Lafayette Nogueira Junior
1   Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University (UNSEP), São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Rodrigo Máximo de Araújo
1   Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University (UNSEP), São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Nathalia de Carvalho Ramos
1   Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University (UNSEP), São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil
2   Department of Dentistry, University of Taubaté (UNITAU), Taubaté, Brazil
,
Marco Antonio Bottino
1   Department of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics, Institute of Science and Technology, São Paulo State University (UNSEP), São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil
,
João Paulo Mendes Tribst 
3   Department of Dental Materials, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
› Author Affiliations Funding None declared.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of the hybrid abutment with different angles (0 and 15 degrees) on the stress distribution and deformation on maxillary implant-supported fixed prosthesis, using digital image correlation (DIC) and finite element analysis (FEA).

Materials and Methods For DIC, two situations were considered: conventional straight implant placement and implant placement with 15 degrees inclination. Different zirconia mesostructures were milled, one straight and the other with a 15-degree angulation to correct the implant positioning. Then, the zirconia mesostructures were cemented to the titanium base (Ti base), and both groups received a lithium disilicate crown. The DIC technique was performed to measure the deformation generated on the simulated bone surface (150 N loading). For the FEA (in silico), three-dimensional numerical models based on the in vitro setup were modeled using computer-aided design software. All materials were considered elastic, isotropic, and homogeneous. Comparison of both methods showed coherence between the in vitro and in silico results. The von-Mises stress of the implants, Ti base and screw, and the maximum principal stress in the mesostructure and crown were calculated for both conditions.

Results The overall surface deformation distributions determined by both techniques were considered similar allowing the model validation. The higher deformation was found in the cervical region with a higher magnitude for the angled hybrid abutment. The same pattern was observed in the stress fields regardless of the analyzed region and structure.

Conclusion Based on this study, using an angled hybrid abutment to correct the implant positioning generated higher stress in the implant fixture, surrounding tissue, Ti base, screw, and crown. Therefore, the implant should be positioned axially, whenever possible, to reduce the mechanical complications.

Keywords

finite element analysis - abutment design - implants - digital image correlation


Publication History

Article published online:
07 March 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Howe MS, Keys W, Richards D. Long-term (10-year) dental implant survival: a systematic review and sensitivity meta-analysis. J Dent 2019; 84: 9-21
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Schimmel M, Srinivasan M, McKenna G, Müller F. Effect of advanced age and/or systemic medical conditions on dental implant survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018; 29 (Suppl. 16) 311-330
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Bottino MA, de Oliveira FR, Sabino CF, Dinato JC, Tribst JP. Survival rate and deformation of external hexagon implants with one-piece zirconia crowns. Metals (Basel) 2021; 11 (07) 1068
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Gomez-Meda R, Esquivel J, Blatz MB. The esthetic biological contour concept for implant restoration emergence profile design. J Esthet Restor Dent 2021; 33 (01) 173-184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Adolfi D, Tribst JPM, Adolfi M, Dal Piva AMO, Saavedra GSFA, Bottino MA. Lithium disilicate crown, zirconia hybrid abutment and platform switching to improve the esthetics in anterior region: a case report. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2020; 12: 31-40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Pandoleon P, Bakopoulou A, Papadopoulou L, Koidis P. Evaluation of the biological behaviour of various dental implant abutment materials on attachment and viability of human gingival fibroblasts. Dent Mater 2019; 35 (07) 1053-1063
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Bottino MA, Rocha RFV, Anami LC, Özcan M, Marques de Melo R. Fracture of zirconia abutment with metallic insertion on anterior single titanium implant with internal hexagon: retrieval analysis of a failure. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2016; 24 (03) 164-168
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Kohal RJ, Weng D, Bächle M, Strub JR. Loaded custom-made zirconia and titanium implants show similar osseointegration: an animal experiment. J Periodontol 2004; 75 (09) 1262-1268
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Abrahamsson I, Berglundh T, Glantz PO, Lindhe J. The mucosal attachment at different abutments. An experimental study in dogs. J Clin Periodontol 1998; 25 (09) 721-727
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Naveau A, Rignon-Bret C, Wulfman C. Zirconia abutments in the anterior region: a systematic review of mechanical and esthetic outcomes. J Prosthet Dent 2019; 121 (05) 775-781.e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Nouh I, Kern M, Sabet AE, Aboelfadl AK, Hamdy AM, Chaar MS. Mechanical behavior of posterior all-ceramic hybrid-abutment-crowns versus hybrid-abutments with separate crowns-a laboratory study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2019; 30 (01) 90-98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Tribst JP, Dal Piva AM, Anami LC, Borges AL, Bottino MA. Influence of implant connection on the stress distribution in restorations performed with hybrid abutments. J Osseointegration 2019; 11 (03) 507-512
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Matos JD, Arcila LV, Ortiz LP. et al. Hybrid abutment during prosthetic planning and oral rehabilitation. Minerva Dent Oral Sci 2021; ;10.23736/S2724-6329.21.04479-4 DOI: 10.23736/s2724-6329.21.04479-4.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Saab XE, Griggs JA, Powers JM, Engelmeier RL. Effect of abutment angulation on the strain on the bone around an implant in the anterior maxilla: a finite element study. J Prosthet Dent 2007; 97 (02) 85-92
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Tian K, Chen J, Han L, Yang J, Huang W, Wu D. Angled abutments result in increased or decreased stress on surrounding bone of single-unit dental implants: a finite element analysis. Med Eng Phys 2012; 34 (10) 1526-1531
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Schubert O, Schweiger J, Stimmelmayr M, Nold E, Güth J-F. Digital implant planning and guided implant surgery - workflow and reliability. Br Dent J 2019; 226 (02) 101-108
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Sousa MP, Tribst JPM, de Oliveira Dal Piva AM, Borges ALS, de Oliveira S, da Cruz PC. Capacity to maintain placement torque at removal, single load-to-failure, and stress concentration of straight and angled abutments. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2019; 39 (02) 213-218
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Kao HC, Gung YW, Chung TF, Hsu ML. 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 (04) 623-630
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Lin CL, Wang JC, Ramp LC, Liu PR. Biomechanical response of implant systems placed in the maxillary posterior region under various conditions of angulation, bone density, and loading. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2008; 23 (01) 57-64
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Rodrigues VA, Tribst JP, Santis LR, Borges AL, Nishioka RS. Biomechanical effect of inclined implants in fixed prosthesis: strain and stress analysis. Rev Odontol UNESP 2018; 47 (04) 237-243
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Rodrigues VA, Tribst JP, de Santis LR, de Lima DR, Nishioka RS. Influence of angulation and vertical misfit in the evaluation of micro-deformations around implants. Braz Dent Sci 2017; 20 (01) 32-39
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Eger DE, Gunsolley JC, Feldman S. Comparison of angled and standard abutments and their effect on clinical outcomes: a preliminary report. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000; 15 (06) 819-823
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Tribst JPM, Dal Piva AMO, Bottino MA, Nishioka RS, Borges ALS, Özcan M. Digital image correlation and finite element analysis of bone strain generated by implant-retained cantilever fixed prosthesis. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2020; 28 (01) 10-17
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Ausiello P, Tribst JPM, Ventre M. et al. The role of cortical zone level and prosthetic platform angle in dental implant mechanical response: a 3D finite element analysis. Dent Mater 2021; 37 (11) 1688-1697
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Monteiro JB, Dal Piva AMO, Tribst JPM, Borges ALS, Tango RN. The effect of resection angle on stress distribution after root-end surgery. Iran Endod J 2018; 13 (02) 188-194
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Tiossi R, Vasco MA, Lin L. et al. Validation of finite element models for strain analysis of implant-supported prostheses using digital image correlation. Dent Mater 2013; 29 (07) 788-796
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Cavallaro Jr J, Greenstein G. Angled implant abutments: a practical application of available knowledge. J Am Dent Assoc 2011; 142 (02) 150-158
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Cantó-Navés O, Marimon X, Ferrer M, Cabratosa-Termes J. Comparison between experimental digital image processing and numerical methods for stress analysis in dental implants with different restorative materials. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2021; 113: 104092
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Karl M, Dickinson A, Holst S, Holst A. Biomechanical methods applied in dentistry: a comparative overview of photoelastic examinations, strain gauge measurements, finite element analysis and three-dimensional deformation analysis. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2009; 17 (02) 50-57
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Tribst JPM, Dal Piva AMO, Madruga CFL. et al. Endocrown restorations: Influence of dental remnant and restorative material on stress distribution. Dent Mater 2018; 34 (10) 1466-1473
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Berahmani S, Janssen D, Verdonschot N. Experimental and computational analysis of micromotions of an uncemented femoral knee implant using elastic and plastic bone material models. J Biomech 2017; 61: 137-143
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 El-Sheikh MAY, Mostafa TMN, El-Sheikh MM. Effect of different angulations and collar lengths of conical hybrid implant abutment on screw loosening after dynamic cyclic loading. Int J Implant Dent 2018; 4 (01) 39
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Shemtov-Yona K, Rittel D. An overview of the mechanical integrity of dental implants. BioMed Res Int 2015; 2015: 547384
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Pereira PHS, Amaral M, Baroudi K, Vitti RP, Nassani MZ, Silva-Concílio LRD. Effect of implant platform connection and abutment material on removal torque and implant hexagon plastic deformation. Eur J Dent 2019; 13 (03) 349-353
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Yüzügüllü B, Avci M. The implant-abutment interface of alumina and zirconia abutments. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2008; 10 (02) 113-121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Stimmelmayr M, Sagerer S, Erdelt K, Beuer F. In vitro fatigue and fracture strength testing of one-piece zirconia implant abutments and zirconia implant abutments connected to titanium cores. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2013; 28 (02) 488-493
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Stimmelmayr M, Edelhoff D, Güth J-F, Erdelt K, Happe A, Beuer F. Wear at the titanium-titanium and the titanium-zirconia implant-abutment interface: a comparative in vitro study. Dent Mater 2012; 28 (12) 1215-1220
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Gehrke P, Johannson D, Fischer C, Stawarczyk B, Beuer F. In vitro fatigue and fracture resistance of one- and two-piece CAD/CAM zirconia implant abutments. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2015; 30 (03) 546-554
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Sailer I, Asgeirsson AG, Thoma DS. et al. Fracture strength of zirconia implant abutments on narrow diameter implants with internal and external implant abutment connections: a study on the titanium resin base concept. Clin Oral Implants Res 2018; 29 (04) 411-423
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Chun HJ, Yeo IS, Lee JH. et al. Fracture strength study of internally connected zirconia abutments reinforced with titanium inserts. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2015; 30 (02) 346-350
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Pjetursson BE, Zarauz C, Strasding M, Sailer I, Zwahlen M, Zembic A. A systematic review of the influence of the implant-abutment connection on the clinical outcomes of ceramic and metal implant abutments supporting fixed implant reconstructions. Clinl Oral implants Res 2018; 29: 160-183
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Datte CE, Tribst JP, Dal Piva AO. et al. Influence of different restorative materials on the stress distribution in dental implants. J Clin Exp Dent 2018; 10 (05) e439-e444
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Morsch CS, Rafael CF, Dumes JFM, Juanito GMP, Souza JGOd, Bianchini MA. Failure of prosthetic screws on 971 implants. Braz J Oral Sci 2015; 14: 195-198
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Ha CY, Lim YJ, Kim MJ, Choi JH. The influence of abutment angulation on screw loosening of implants in the anterior maxilla. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2011; 26 (01) 45-55
    Google Scholar
  • 45 Clelland NL, Lee JK, Bimbenet OC, Brantley WA. A three-dimensional finite element stress analysis of angled abutments for an implant placed in the anterior maxilla. J Prosthodont 1995; 4 (02) 95-100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Tribst JP, Rodrigues VA, Dal Piva AO, Borges AL, Nishioka RS. The importance of correct implants positioning and masticatory load direction on a fixed prosthesis. J Clin Exp Dent 2018; 10 (01) e81-e87
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Bola M, Simões J, Ramos A. Finite element model validation based on an experimental model of the intact shoulder joint. Med Eng Phys 2021; 87: 1-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Miller EJ, Holguin AC, Cruz J, Lokos WA. Strain Gage load calibration of the wing interface fittings for the adaptive compliant trailing edge flap flight test. In: 52nd Aerospace Sciences Meeting. Reston, Virginia: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics; 2014
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Bathe K-J. Finite Element Procedures in Engineering Analysis. Old Tappan, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1982
    Google Scholar