Comparison of two subperiosteal implant designs in total maxillectomy: A 3-D finite element analysis.

IF 2.2 3区医学 Q2 Dentistry

Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Pub Date : 2025-04-15 DOI:10.1016/j.jormas.2025.102377

Ilgın Ari, Gülin Acar

{"title":"Comparison of two subperiosteal implant designs in total maxillectomy: A 3-D finite element analysis.","authors":"Ilgın Ari, Gülin Acar","doi":"10.1016/j.jormas.2025.102377","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: This study aims to compare two different subperiosteal implant designs using three-dimensional finite element analysis (FEA) and to investigate the load distribution on the prosthetic components and the surrounding bone.Material and method: This study was conducted using a 3D representation of a Class II fully resected maxillary bone, generated. Two treatment scenarios were developed: SC-1 featured a conventional subperiosteal design, and SC-2 applied a diagonal bar design in the zygomatic region. A total force of 450 Newtons in a vertical direction and 93 Newtons in an oblique force were applied to mimic mastication forces. The maximum and minimum principal stress values on bone and von Mises stress (VMs) values on implant components' were measured.Results: The results showed that under vertical forces, the SC-2 design exhibited higher maximum stress (Pmax) values in the zygomaticomaxillary area. Under oblique forces, stress values were higher in SC-2 in both areas compared to SC-1. VMs values on the screws were lower in SC-1 under vertical forces, while under oblique forces, they were lower in SC-2.Conclusion: The findings suggest that the SC-2 design did not provide significant advantages over the conventional subperiosteal implant design. Future studies should focus on enhancing the conventional design by incorporating support from different anatomical areas.","PeriodicalId":56038,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"102377"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jormas.2025.102377","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to compare two different subperiosteal implant designs using three-dimensional finite element analysis (FEA) and to investigate the load distribution on the prosthetic components and the surrounding bone.

Material and method: This study was conducted using a 3D representation of a Class II fully resected maxillary bone, generated. Two treatment scenarios were developed: SC-1 featured a conventional subperiosteal design, and SC-2 applied a diagonal bar design in the zygomatic region. A total force of 450 Newtons in a vertical direction and 93 Newtons in an oblique force were applied to mimic mastication forces. The maximum and minimum principal stress values on bone and von Mises stress (VMs) values on implant components' were measured.

Results: The results showed that under vertical forces, the SC-2 design exhibited higher maximum stress (Pmax) values in the zygomaticomaxillary area. Under oblique forces, stress values were higher in SC-2 in both areas compared to SC-1. VMs values on the screws were lower in SC-1 under vertical forces, while under oblique forces, they were lower in SC-2.

Conclusion: The findings suggest that the SC-2 design did not provide significant advantages over the conventional subperiosteal implant design. Future studies should focus on enhancing the conventional design by incorporating support from different anatomical areas.

查看原文本刊更多论文

两种骨膜下种植体设计在上颌全切除术中的比较：三维有限元分析。

目的：利用三维有限元分析（FEA）比较两种不同的骨膜下种植体设计，并研究假体构件和周围骨的载荷分布。材料和方法：本研究使用生成的II类完全切除的上颌骨的3D表示进行。提出了两种治疗方案：SC-1采用传统的骨膜下设计，SC-2在颧骨区域采用对角棒设计。在垂直方向上施加450牛顿的总力，在倾斜方向上施加93牛顿的总力来模拟咀嚼力。测量骨的最大、最小主应力值和种植体构件的von Mises应力（vm）值。结果：在垂直力作用下，SC-2设计的颧颌区最大应力（Pmax）值较高。在斜向力作用下，SC-2在两个区域的应力值均高于SC-1。在垂直力作用下，SC-1螺钉上的vm值较低，在斜向力作用下，SC-2螺钉上的vm值较低。结论：研究结果表明SC-2设计与传统的骨膜下种植体设计相比并没有明显的优势。未来的研究应侧重于通过结合不同解剖区域的支持来改进传统的设计。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Dentistry-Oral Surgery

CiteScore

2.20

自引率

9.10%

发文量

305

期刊介绍： J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg publishes research papers and techniques - (guest) editorials, original articles, reviews, technical notes, case reports, images, letters to the editor, guidelines - dedicated to enhancing surgical expertise in all fields relevant to oral and maxillofacial surgery: from plastic and reconstructive surgery of the face, oral surgery and medicine, … to dentofacial and maxillofacial orthopedics. Original articles include clinical or laboratory investigations and clinical or equipment reports. Reviews include narrative reviews, systematic reviews and meta-analyses. All manuscripts submitted to the journal are subjected to peer review by international experts, and must: Be written in excellent English, clear and easy to understand, precise and concise; Bring new, interesting, valid information - and improve clinical care or guide future research; Be solely the work of the author(s) stated; Not have been previously published elsewhere and not be under consideration by another journal; Be in accordance with the journal''s Guide for Authors'' instructions: manuscripts that fail to comply with these rules may be returned to the authors without being reviewed. Under no circumstances does the journal guarantee publication before the editorial board makes its final decision. The journal is indexed in the main international databases and is accessible worldwide through the ScienceDirect and ClinicalKey Platforms.