Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences, (18), p. e191505, 2019

DOI: 10.20396/bjos.v18i0.8657252

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Stress distribution in the peri-implant area of pure titanium and titanium-zirconium small implants

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Red circle
Preprint: archiving forbidden
Red circle
Postprint: archiving forbidden
Orange circle
Published version: archiving restricted
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Aim: In dental implant treatment, there is a demand for mechanically stronger implants. Despite the existence of several studies showing the clinical success of narrow diameter implants, most of them are based on pure titanium (cpTi) alloys. There is a few clinical evidences of the success rate of titanium-zirconium (TiZr) narrow diameter implants. The aim of this study was to evaluate the stress distribution in the peri-implant area of narrow diameter cpTi and TiZr implants under axial and oblique loads. Methods: Photoelastic models were produced using epoxy resin (PL2, Vishay Precision Group) from a master model. The implants (cpTi and TiZr; Straumann AG) had 3.3 mm in diameter and 12 mm in height. Loads of 100 N and 200 N were applied to the abutment at angles of 0° (axial), 10°, 20°, and 30° (oblique). A circular polariscope (Eikonal) was used under dark field white-light configuration. The isochromatic fringes were analyzed in the peri-implant region in 5 areas, using ASTM table with isochromatic fringes; cervical-mesial, cervical-distal, mid-mesial, mid-distal and apical. Results: In general, under axial and oblique loads, the stress in the TiZr implant was lower than in the cpTi implant. The load of 200 N produced the highest stress values in cpTi and TiZr implants. In both implants and loads, the fringes were located more in apical area at all angles evaluated. Conclusion: It can be concluded that for small implants, the load inclination and intensity change the pattern of stress distribution and the cpTi implant exhibited the highest peri-implant stress.