Ibrahim, E., Elsharkawy, A., Nassif, M., Rady, N. (2020). EVALUATION OF STRAIN DEVELOPED AROUND SHORT DENTAL IMPLANTS USING TWO DIFFERENT RESTORATIVE MATERIALS (IN VITROSTUDY). test, 45(1), 80-87. doi: 10.21608/adjalexu.2020.79944
Eman A. Ibrahim; Ahlam Elsharkawy; Mohamed S Nassif; Nermeen A Rady. "EVALUATION OF STRAIN DEVELOPED AROUND SHORT DENTAL IMPLANTS USING TWO DIFFERENT RESTORATIVE MATERIALS (IN VITROSTUDY)". test, 45, 1, 2020, 80-87. doi: 10.21608/adjalexu.2020.79944
Ibrahim, E., Elsharkawy, A., Nassif, M., Rady, N. (2020). 'EVALUATION OF STRAIN DEVELOPED AROUND SHORT DENTAL IMPLANTS USING TWO DIFFERENT RESTORATIVE MATERIALS (IN VITROSTUDY)', test, 45(1), pp. 80-87. doi: 10.21608/adjalexu.2020.79944
Ibrahim, E., Elsharkawy, A., Nassif, M., Rady, N. EVALUATION OF STRAIN DEVELOPED AROUND SHORT DENTAL IMPLANTS USING TWO DIFFERENT RESTORATIVE MATERIALS (IN VITROSTUDY). test, 2020; 45(1): 80-87. doi: 10.21608/adjalexu.2020.79944

EVALUATION OF STRAIN DEVELOPED AROUND SHORT DENTAL IMPLANTS USING TWO DIFFERENT RESTORATIVE MATERIALS (IN VITROSTUDY)

Alexandria Dental Journal
Article 14, Volume 45, Issue 1, April 2020, Pages 80-87    PDF (244.77 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.21608/adjalexu.2020.79944
Authors
Eman A. Ibrahim* 1; Ahlam Elsharkawy2; Mohamed S Nassif3; Nermeen A Rady4
1Instructor at prosthodontic department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
2Professor at Prosthodontics department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
3Assistant Professor at Biomaterials department, Faculty of dentistry, University of Ain Shams, Cairo, Egypt.
4Lecturer at prosthodontics department, Faculty of dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Abstract
Introduction: The use of short implants has been introduced as an alternative treatment for posterior regions, however, it leads to serious prosthetic complications. Using CAD/CAM, materials like zirconia and Bio-HPP can be used to fabricate implant supported restorations.
Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the strains developed around short and standard implant length using two different crown materials.
Materials and methods: Polyurethane blocks (n=20) were used as alternative materials for human cancellous bone. Blocks were divided into two groups, group A received ten standard length implants 12 mm, and group B received ten short implants 7 mm. Each group was equally subdivided into two subgroups, according to crown material (BioHPP and zirconia). Universal testing machine was used to apply a load of 100 N axially and obliquely at 45° on the restorations. Microstrains were measured using strain meter.
Results:The difference in microstrain values between BioHPP and zirconia was statistically insignificant for both group A and group B. Comparing between group A and group B having the same restorative materials, it was found that, the difference was statistically significant for zirconia in axial loading only. A significant difference was observed between oblique and axial loads in standard implant length for both BioHPP and zirconia restorations, and for zirconia in short implants as well (p value=0.043), while the difference was insignificant for BioHPP in short implants.
Conclusions: Short implants are comparable treatment modality to standard implant lengths for single tooth restoration. Oblique forces produce more stresses than vertical forces. According to the average of loads, there is no significant difference between BioHPP and zirconia for both short and standard implant length. However, it is advisable not to use zirconia restorations with short implants.
Keywords
Short implants; Crown/implant ratio; CAD/CAM; Zirconia; High Performance Polymer; Strain gauge
References
  1. de Carvalho EB, Herbst PE, Faria AC, Ribeiro RF, Costa PP, Tiossi R. Strain transfer behavior of different planning options for mandibular single-molar replacement. J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Feb;119(2):250-256.
  2. Friberg B, Ivanoff CJ, Lekholm U. Inferior Alveolar Nerve Transposition in Combination with Brånemark replant Treatment. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent. 1992 Dec 1;12(6):440-9.
  3. Pozzi A, Sannino G, Barlattani A. Minimally invasive treatment of the atrophic posterior maxilla: a proof-ofconcept prospective study with a follow-up of between 36 and 54 months. J Prosthet Dent. 2012 Nov 30;108:286-97.
  4. Block MS, Haggerty CJ. Interpositional osteotomy for posterior mandible ridge augmentation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009 Nov 30;67:31-9.
  5. Hämmerle CH, Jung RE, Feloutzis A. A systematic review of the survival of implants in bone sites augmented with barrier membranes (guided bone regeneration) in partially edentulous patients. J Clin Periodontol. 2002 Dec 1;29:226-31.
  6. Barone A, Toti P, Menchini-Fabris GB, Felice P, Marchionni S, Covani U. Early volumetric changes after vertical augmentation of the atrophic posterior mandible with interpositional block graft versus onlay bone graft: A retrospective radiological study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017 Sep;45:1438-47.
  7. Man Y, Wang T, Mo A, Qu Y. Implant over implant: An alternative method for solving malpositioned osseointegrated implants at the sinus floor. J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Oct 31;112(4):731-5.
  8. Mezzomo LA, Miller R, Triches D, Alonso F, Shinkai RS. Meta‐analysis of single crowns supported by short (< 10 mm) implants in the posterior region. J Clin Periodontol. 2014 Feb 1;41:191-213.
  9. Lee SA, Lee CT, Fu MM, Elmisalati W, Chuang SK. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials for the management of limited vertical height in the posterior region: short implants (5 to 8 mm) vs longer implants (> 8 mm) in vertically augmented sites. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014 Sep 1;29;1085-97.
  10. Lemos CA, 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 Apr 30;47:8-17.
  11. Morand M, Irinakis T. The challenge of implant therapy in the posterior maxilla: providing a rationale for the use of short implants. J Oral Implantol. 2007 Oct;33:257-66.
  12. Schulte J, Flores AM, Weed M. Crown-to-implant ratios of single tooth implant-supported restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2007 Jul 31;98(1):1-5.
  13. Blanes RJ. To what extent does the crown-implant ratio affect the survival and complications of implantsupported reconstructions? A systematic review. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:67-72.
  14. Gonçalves TM, Bortolini S, Martinolli M, Alfenas BF, Peruzzo DC, Natali A et al. Long-term short implants performance: systematic review and meta-analysis of the essential assessment parameters. Braz Dent J. 2015 Aug;26:325-36.
  15. Gehrke SA. Importance of crown height ratios in dental implants on the fracture strength of different connection designs: an in vitro study. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015 Aug 1;17:790-7.
  16. Gentile MA, Chuang SK, Dodson TB. Survival estimates and risk factors for failure with 6 x 5.7-mm implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2005;20: 930- 7.
  17. Ali Al-Hashedi A, Bai Taiyeb Ali T, Yunus N. Short dental implants: an emerging concept in implant treatment. Quintessence Int. 2014 Jun 1;45:499–514.
  18. Zoidis P, Papathanasiou I. Modified PEEK resin-bonded fixed dental prosthesis as an interim restoration after implant placement. J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Nov 30;116:637-41.
  19. Heimer S, Schmidlin PR, Roos M, Stawarczyk B. Surface properties of polyetheretherketone after different laboratory and chairside polishing protocols. J Prosthet Dent. 2017 Mar 31;117:419-25.
  20. Fabbri G, Sorrentino R, Brennan M, Cerutti A. A novel approach to implant screw-retained restorations: adhesive combination between zirconia frameworks and monolithic lithium disilicate. Int J Esthet Dent. 2014; 9:490-505.
  21. Stafford GD, Glantz PO. Intraoral strain gauge measurements on complete dentures: a methodological study. J Dent.1991 Apr 1;19:80-4.
  22. Di Stefano DA, Arosio P, Gastaldi G, Gherlone E. The insertion torque-depth curve integral as a measure of implant primary stability: An in vitro study on polyurethane foam blocks. J Prosthet Dent. 2017 Jul 8.
  23. Almeida KP, Delgado-Ruiz R, Carneiro LG, Leiva AB, Calvo-Guirado JL, Gómez-Moreno G et al. Influence of Drilling Speed on Stability of Tapered Dental Implants: An Ex Vivo Experimental Study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2016 Jul 1;31:795-8.
  24. Sarendranath A, Khan R, Tovar N, Marin C, Yoo D, Redisch J et al. Effect of low speed drilling on osseointegration using simplified drilling procedures. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015 Jul 1;53:550-6.
  25. Nishioka RS, Vasconcellos LG, Jóias RP, Rode SD. Load-application devices: a comparative strain gauge analysis. Braz Dent J. 2015 Jun;26:258-62.
  26. Huang HL, Chang YY, Lin DJ, Li YF, Chen KT, Hsu JT. Initial stability and bone strain evaluation of the immediately loaded dental implant: an in vitro model study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2011 Jul 1;22:691-8.
  27. Kola MZ, Shah AH, Khalil HS, Rabah AM, Harby NM, Sabra SA et al. Surgical templates for dental implant positioning; current knowledge and clinical perspectives Niger J Surg. 2015 Jan;21:1-5.
  28. Kaleli N, Sarac D, Külünk S, Öztürk Ö. Effect of different restorative crown and customized abutment materials on stress distribution in single implants and peripheral bone: A three-dimensional finite element analysis study. J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Mar 1;119:437-45.
  29. El-Anwar MI, El-Mofty MS, Awad AH, El-Sheikh SA, El-Zawahry MM. The effect of using different crown and implant materials on bone stress distribution: a finite element study. Egyptian Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. 2014 May 1;5:58-64.
  30. Barão VA, Delben JA, Lima J, Cabral T, Assunção WG. Comparison of different designs of implant-retained overdentures and fixed full-arch implant-supported prosthesis on stress distribution in edentulous mandible– a computed tomography-based three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Biomech. 2013 Apr 26;46:1312-20.
  31. Soliman TA, Tamam RA, Yousief SA, El-Anwar MI. Assessment of stress distribution around implant fixture with three different crown materials. Tanta Dental Journal. 2015 Dec 1;12:1-10.
  32. Bechir ES, Bechir AN, Gioga CH, Manu R, Burcea AL, Dascalu IT. The advantages of BioHPP polymer as superstructure material in oral implantology. Materiale Plastice. 2016 Sep 1;53:394-8.
  33. Edher F, Nguyen CT. Short dental implants: A scoping review of the literature for patients with head and neck cancer. J Prosthet Dent. 2018 May;119:736-42.
  34. Lai HC, Si MS, Zhuang LF, Shen H, Liu YL, Wismeijer D. Long‐term outcomes of short dental implants supporting single crowns in posterior region: a clinical retrospective study of 5–10 years. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013 Feb; 24:230-7.
  35. Guljé FL, Raghoebar GM, Vissink A, Meijer HJ. Single crowns in the resorbed posterior maxilla supported by either 6-mm implants or by 11-mm implants combined with sinus floor elevation surgery: a 1-year randomised controlled trial. Eur J Oral Implantol. 2014 Sep 1;7:247- 55.
  36. Hagi D, Deporter DA, Pilliar RM, Arenovich T. A targeted review of study outcomes with short (≤ 7 mm) endosseous dental implants placed in partially edentulous patients. J Periodontol. 2004 Jun 1;75:798- 804.
  37. Telleman G, Raghoebar GM, Vissink A, Den Hartog L, Huddleston Slater JJ, Meijer HJ. A systematic review of the prognosis of short (< 10 mm) dental implants placed in the partially edentulous patient. J Clin Periodontol. 2011 Jul 1;38:667-76.
  38. Bourauel C, Aitlahrach M, Heinemann F, Hasan I. Biomechanical finite element analysis of small diameter and short dental implants: extensive study of commercial implants. Biomedizinische Technik/Biomedical Engineering. 2012 Feb 1;57:21-32.
  39. Paliwal S, Saxena D, Mittal R, Chaudhary S. Occlusal Principles and Considerations for Implants: An Overview. Journal of Academy of Dental Education. 2014 Dec 1; 1:17-21.
  40. Güngör MB, Yılmaz H. Evaluation of stress distributions occurring on zirconia and titanium implant-supported prostheses: a three-dimensional finiteelement analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2016 Sep 1;116:346- 55.
Statistics
Article View: 375
PDF Download: 699