EC Dental Science

Research Article Volume 23 Issue 1 - 2024

A Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of the Stress Distribution Around the Fixture Dental Implant Using Three Alternative Superstructures Fixed Restorations

Salah A Yousief1,2*,Mahmoud Abd-Allah M Mekkey3,Ahmed M Sleem Abd-Elglel4,Mohammed Salah Alqattan6, Ali Mohammad Alqarni5, Hamzah Samer Allam5, Suhayb Mahmoud Alsharif5, Dalal Abdulaziz Alnafisah7 and Manar K. Alamri8

1Department of Restorative and Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Dar Al Uloom University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
2Department of Crown and Bridge, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Al Azhar University, Assiut, Egypt
3Lecturer, Fixed Prosthodontics Department, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, South Valley University, Egypt
4Lecturer of Fixed Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Assuit Branch, Egypt
5General Dentist- KSA
6collage of Dentistry, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University Box 1982, Dammam,31411, Saudi Arabia
7Dentist Resident, Ministry of Health -KSA 8College of Dentistry, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia

*Corresponding Author: Salah A Yousief, Department of Restorative and Prosthetic Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Dar Al Uloom University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and Department of Crown and Bridge, Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine, Al Azhar University, Assiut, Egypt.
Received: December 05, 2023; Published: December 29, 2023



Aim of the Study: This study's objective was to evaluate the stress distribution around a fixture with three alternative superstructure-fixed restorations.

Materials and Methods: This study aimed to examine the effects of immediate versus delayed loading of two types of crown materials (in-cream - porcelain bonded to metal crowns) on the peri-implant soft and hard tissue.

The patients were divided into two groups depending on when the implants were loaded.

Patients in group I received implants using a delayed loading technique that involved submerging the implants for six months (ten implants).

Group II patients had immediate implant loading, temporary restorations were created using occlusion, and three weeks later, permanent restorations were placed in occlusion (ten implants).

Each group was then divided into two subgroups, each with five implants, based on the type of superstructure materials used in the study: Subgroup A: To repair implants, metallic crowns were covered with low-fusing porcelain veneers.

The crown restorations on the implants in subgroup B were [all ceramic in-ceramic, alumina].

As part of the clinical examination of the cases, the gingival index and pocket depth at the loading time and 3, 6, and 9 months after loading were noted.

Foto assesses one loss and bone density surrounding the implants; radiographic examination also includes an isoquant semi-direct semi-direct biography.

Results: Standard deviation (SD) values were presented along with the data. The student's t-test was used to compare the two groups and the two supra-structure kinds. Using a paired t-test, each group’s temporal course of changes was investigated. Non-parametric tests were used for the comparisons since the GI data had a non-parametric distribution. The Mann-Whitney U test results were compared between the two groups. This non-parametric test is used in place of the t-test performed on the students. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test examined how each group changed over time. Non-parametric tests were employed for the comparisons due to the non-parametric distribution of the data on bone loss. The Mann-Whitney U test results were compared between the two groups. This non-parametric test is used in place of the t-test performed on the students. The criterion for significance was set at P 0.05. The statistical analysis was performed using SPSS for Windows, version 16.0 of the Statistical Package for Scientific Studies.

Conclusion: Statistics were applied to the tabulated data; the following conclusion could be drawn from this study: 1-Delayed loading implants had significantly higher bone density and lower bone loss than immediate loading implants regardless of the supra-structure type.

 Keywords: Implant; All Ceramic; Metal Ceramic; Immediate Loading; Delayed Loading

  1. Geckili O., et al. “Clinical and radiographic evaluation of three-implant-retained mandibular overdentures: A 3-year retrospective study”. Quintessence International9 (2011): 721-728.
  2. Güngör MB and Yılmaz H. “Evaluation of stress distributions occurring on zirconia and titanium implant-supported prostheses: A three-dimensional finite element analysis”. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry3 (2016): 346-355.
  3. Jomjunyong K., et al. “Stress distribution of various designs of prostheses on short implants or standard implants in posterior maxilla: a three-dimensional finite element analysis”. Oral and Implantology4 (2017): 369-380.
  4. Primo BT., et al. “Clinical and radiographic assessment of three-implant–supported fixed-prosthesis rehabilitation of the edentulous mandible: immediate versus delayed loading”. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants3 (2018): 653-660.
  5. Ezzy H., et al. “A comparative evaluation of stress distribution in the peri-implant bone with a combination of three different implant abutment and crown materials: A three-dimensional finite element study”.
  6. Al-Omiri MK., et al. “Combined implant, and tooth support: an up-to-date comprehensive overview”. International Journal of Dentistry (2017): 6024565.
  7. Al Zahrani S and Al Mutairi AA. “Crestal bone loss around submerged and non-submerged dental implants in individuals with type-2 diabetes mellitus: a 7-year prospective clinical study”. Medical Principles and Practice1 (2019): 75-81.
  8. Zavattero E., et al. “Implant dental rehabilitation of fibula-free flap reconstructed jaws”. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery2 (2021): e134-e136.
  9. Galal RM., et al. “Clinical and radiographic outcomes of three different loading protocols for single-implant-supported prostheses: A randomized controlled trial”. Journal of International Oral Health4 (2021): 180.
  10. Miura KI., et al. “Long‐term clinical and radiographic evaluation after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with octacalcium phosphate–collagen composite: A retrospective case series study”. Journal of Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine7 (2022): 621-633.
  11. Marcello M., et al. “Radiographic evaluation of the bone remodeling on tilted osseointegrated implants: follow-up at 1 year”. The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice4 (2020): 463-470.
  12. Gheisari R., et al. “Comparison of the marginal bone loss in one-stage versus two-stage implant surgery”. Journal of Dentistry4 (2017): 272-276.
  13. Berberi AN., et al. “Influence of surgical and prosthetic techniques on marginal bone loss around titanium implants. Part I: immediate loading in fresh extraction sockets”. Journal of Prosthodontics on Dental Implants 4 (2015): 27-34.
  14. Ahmed M Elmarakby., et al. “Evaluation of early loading versus immediate loading of dental implants: a comparative study”. EC Dental Science 19 (2020): 1-12.
  15. Shin YG., et al. “Influence of an implant fixture including a freely removable micro-locking implant prosthesis on peri-implant tissues and implant prostheses: a prospective clinical study”. Journal of Clinical Medicine15 (2021): 3321.
  16. Gheisari R., et al. “Comparison of the marginal bone loss in one-stage versus two-stage implant surgery”. Journal of Dentistry4 (2017): 272-276.
  17. Shin YG., et al. “Influence of an implant fixture including a freely removable micro-locking implant prosthesis on peri-implant tissues and implant prostheses: a prospective clinical study”. Journal of Clinical Medicine 15 (2021): 3321.
  18. Soliman TA., et al. “Assessment of stress distribution around implant fixture with three different crown materials”. Tanta Dental Journal4 (2015): 249-258.
  19. El-Anwar MI., et al. “A finite element study on stress distribution of two different attachment designs under implant-supported overdenture”. The Saudi Dental Journal 4 (2015): 201-207.
  20. El-Anwar MI., et al. “The effect of different abutment materials of the implant on stress distribution using three-dimensional finite element analysis”. Medical Research Journal2 (2013): 115-123.
  21. Drago CJ and Lazzara RJ. “Immediate provisional restoration of Osseotite implants: a clinical report of 18-month results”. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants4 (2004): 534-541.
  22. Nikellis I., et al. “Immediate loading of 190 endosseous dental implants: a prospective observational study of 40 patient treatments with up to 2-year data”. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants1 (2004): 116-123.
  23. Misch CE. “The density of bone: effect on treatment plans, surgical approach, healing, and progressive bone loading”. The International Journal of Oral Implantology: Implantology2 (1990): 23-31.
  24. Branemark PI. “Introduction to osseointegration”. Tissue-integrated prostheses (1985): 11-76.
  25. Stephen FR., et al. “Contemporary fixed prosthodontics”. St. Louis, Mo: Mosby Elsevier (2006).
  26. Akagawa Y., et al. “Initial bone-implant interfaces of submergible and supramergible endosseous single-crystal sapphire implants”. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry1 (1986): 96-100.
  27. Siddiqui AA., et al. “Immediate loading of dental implants in the edentulous mandible: a preliminary case report from an international perspective multicenter study”. Compendium of Continuing Education in Dentistry (Jamesburg, NJ: 1995)10 (2001): 867-884.
  28. Brunski JB. “In vivo bone response to biomechanical loading at the bone/dental-implant interface”. Advances in Dental Research1 (1999): 99-119.
  29. Stegaroiu R., et al. “The influence of prosthesis material on stress distribution in bone and implant is a 3-dimensional finite element analysis”. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Implants 6 (1998): 781-790.
  30. Proussaefs P and Lozada J. “Immediate loading of hydroxyapatite-coated implants in the maxillary premolar area: three-year pilot study results”. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry3 (2004): 228-233.
  31. Soliman TA., et al. “Assessment of stress distribution around implant fixture with three different crown materials”. Tanta Dental Journal4 (2015): 249-258.
  32. Memari Y., et al. “Finite element analysis of stress distribution around short and long implants in mandibular overdenture treatment”. Dental Research Journal1 (2020): 25-33.
  33. Wirring US., et al. “Clinical and radiological evaluation of marginal bone loss around dental implants restored with zirconium vis-à-vis porcelain fused to metal: an in vivo study”. Dental Journal of Advance Studies1 (2020): 17-21.
  34. Merdji A., et al. “Stress distribution in dental prosthesis under an occlusal combined dynamic loading”. Materials and Design (1980-2015) 36 (2012): 705-713.
  35. Oxby G., et al. “Early loading of fluoridated implants placed in fresh extraction sockets and healed bone: a 3‐to 5‐year clinical and radiographic follow‐up study of 39 consecutive patients”. Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research5 (2015): 898-907.
  36. Tammam R., et al. “Comparison of biological stability, and healthy of peri-implant tissues of different ceramic crown materials restoring a single implant. Prospective clinical study-1 year”. International Journal of Dentistry and Oral Science 8 (2021): 4446.
  37. Degirmenci K., et al. “Evaluation of reliability of zirconia materials to be used in implant-retained restoration on the atrophic bone of the posterior maxilla: A finite element study”. The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics 2 (2019): 112-119.
  38. Huang LS., et al. “Biomechanical evaluation of bridge span with three implant abutment designs and two connectors for tooth-implant supported prosthesis: A finite element analysis”. Journal of Dental Sciences1 (2023): 248-263.
  39. Huang YC., et al. “Biomechanical analysis of rigid and non-rigid connection with implant abutment designs for tooth-implant supported prosthesis: A finite element analysis”. Journal of Dental Sciences1 (2022): 490-499.
  40. Bahuguna R., et al. “Evaluation of stress patterns in the bone around the dental implant for different abutment angulations under axial and oblique loading: A finite element analysis”. National Journal of Maxillofacial Surgery1 (2013): 46-51.
  41. Zanardi PR., et al. “Stress distribution around dental implants placed at different depths”. Journal of Craniofacial Surgery7 (2015): 2163-2166.

Salah A Yousief., et al. “A Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of the Stress Distribution Around the Fixture Dental Implant Using Three Alternative Superstructures Fixed Restorations”.”. EC Dental Science 23.1 (2024): 01-21.

ECronicon Journal

Our Services

Quick Links

Information

Creative Commons LicenseOpen Access by ECronicon is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Based on a work at www.ecronicon.net