[Selection of optimal length and diameter of mini implant in two different forces: a three-dimensional finite element analysis].

Yingjuan Lu, Shaohai Chang, Hong Wu, Yansong Yu, Yushan Ye, Lanru Chang, Wei Wang
Author Information

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of different length and diameters on the stability of mini implant and to select optimal length and diameter using continuous variation of parameters.
METHODS: To perform 3-dimensional finite element analysis, finite element models of a maxilla, and mini implants with length of 6-12 mm and diameters of 1.2-2.0 mm were generated. Load of two different forces were applied to the head of mini implant. One type was horizontal force (HF), the other was composite force (CF). The maximum equivalent stress (Max EQV) in maxilla and the maximum displacement (Max DM) of mini implant were evaluated.
RESULTS: The Max EQV in maxilla and Max DM of mini implant decreased as length and diameter increased. When length was more than 9 mm, the evaluation indexes were small and had a less change. Datas indicated that diameter played a more important role in reducing target, and was a more effective parameter in reducing Max EQV when CF was loaded.
CONCLUSION: From biomechanical point of view, the choice of the length should not be more than 9 mm. When CF is loaded using the mini implant, diameter exceeding 1.2 mm are optimal design for mini implant.

References

  1. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 Feb;139(2):e147-52 [PMID: 21300225]
  2. Angle Orthod. 2007 Jul;77(4):653-9 [PMID: 17605484]
  3. J Biomech. 2010 Aug 10;43(11):2174-81 [PMID: 20466376]
  4. Comput Biol Med. 2010 Aug;40(8):681-6 [PMID: 20599193]
  5. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2011 Apr;46(4):205-9 [PMID: 21612707]
  6. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2011 Nov-Dec;26(6):1279-87 [PMID: 22167434]
  7. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2011 Feb;29(1):27-30 [PMID: 21427895]
  8. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005 Feb;127(2):186-95 [PMID: 15750537]
  9. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009 Jan;38(1):13-8 [PMID: 18963818]
  10. Ying Yong Sheng Tai Xue Bao. 2004 Jun;15(6):1056-62 [PMID: 15362635]
  11. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1993;8(2):151-61 [PMID: 8359870]
  12. Eur J Orthod. 2011 Oct;33(5):468-75 [PMID: 21852288]
  13. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012 Jan;141(1):71-80 [PMID: 22196187]

MeSH Term

Dental Implants
Dental Stress Analysis
Finite Element Analysis
Humans
Maxilla
Stress, Mechanical

Chemicals

Dental Implants

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0minilengthimplantdiametermmMaxdifferentoptimalfiniteelementmaxillaCFEQVdiametersusing1twoforcemaximumDM9reducingloadedOBJECTIVE:investigateeffectstabilityselectcontinuousvariationparametersMETHODS:perform3-dimensionalanalysismodelsimplants6-122-20generatedLoadforcesappliedheadOnetypehorizontalHFcompositeequivalentstressdisplacementevaluatedRESULTS:decreasedincreasedevaluationindexessmalllesschangeDatasindicatedplayedimportantroletargeteffectiveparameterCONCLUSION:biomechanicalpointviewchoiceexceeding2design[Selectionforces:three-dimensionalanalysis]

Similar Articles

Cited By