有限元分析不同材料对超短种植体的影响

doi:10.13591/j.cnki.kqyx.2023.04.004

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的应用有限元分析研究不同种植材料对超短种植体及周围骨的应力影响效果,旨在为超短种植体修复下颌第一磨牙的应用奠定理论基础。方法通过SoildWorks软件建立下颌骨模型和三种不同材质的一段式超短种植体模型,三种材质分别为氧化锆(ZrO)、钛锆合金(Ti-Zr)、碳纤维加强型聚醚醚酮(carbon fiber reinforced polyether ether ketone,CFR-PEEK)。采用ABAQUS有限元软件模拟咬合力对每个模型施加轴向以及斜向载荷,运算并分析种植体及周围骨的应力分布情况。结果 CFR-PEEK组种植体以及皮质骨的Von-Mises应力值低于Ti-Zr组和ZrO组。结论采用超短种植体修复骨量不足的下颌第一磨牙区,从生物力学角度分析采用CFR-PEEK比 Ti-Zr和ZrO更有优势。

关键词: 超短种植体, 三维有限元, 碳纤维加强型聚醚醚酮, 氧化锆, 钛锆合金

Abstract:

Objective Finite element analysis was used to study the effect of different implant materials on the stress of ultra-short implants and surrounding bone, in order to lay a theoretical foundation for the application of ultra-short implants in the restoration of mandibular first molars. Methods The mandible model was established by SoildWorks software and the one-step ultra-short implant model was made of three different materials, namely ZrO, Ti-Zr and CFR-PEEK. ABAQUS finite element software was used to simulate the bite force and apply axial load to each model to calculate and analyze the stress distribution of implants and surrounding bone. Results Von-Mises stress values of implants and cortical bone in the CFR-PEEK group were lower than the Ti-Zr and ZrO groups. Conclusion Compared with Ti-Zr and ZrO, CFR-PEEK has more advantages in repairing mandibular first molar area with bone deficiency from the perspective of biomechanics.

Key words: ultra-short implant, three-dimensional finite element, carbon fiber reinforced polyether ether ketone, zirconia, titanium-zirconium alloy

中图分类号:

R783.1

吕虹雨,孙毅,李天佑,谢伟丽. 有限元分析不同材料对超短种植体的影响[J]. 口腔医学, 2023, 43(4): 308-311.

LYU Hongyu,SUN Yi,LI Tianyou,XIE Weili. Effects of different materials on ultra-short implants by finite element analysis[J]. Stomatology, 2023, 43(4): 308-311.

图/表 5

表1

表2

图1

图2

表3

参考文献 25

[1]	Altaib FH, Alqutaibi AY, Al-Fahd A, et al. Short dental implant as alternative to long implant with bone augmentation of the atrophic posterior ridge: A systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs[J]. Quintessence Int, 2019, 50(8):636-650. doi: 10.3290/j.qi.a42948 pmid: 31372602
[2]	Al-Johany SS, Al Amri MD, Alsaeed S, et al. Dental implant length and diameter: A proposed classification scheme[J]. J Prosthodont, 2017, 26(3):252-260. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12517 pmid: 27379723
[3]	Han J, Tang Z, Zhang X, et al. A prospective, multi-center study assessing early loading with short implants in posterior regions. A 3-year post-loading follow-up study[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2018, 20(1):34-42. doi: 10.1111/cid.2018.20.issue-1
[4]	Benlidayi ME, Ucar Y, Tatli U, et al. Short Implants versus standard implants: Midterm outcomes of a clinical study[J]. Implant Dent, 2018, 27(1):95-100. doi: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000710 pmid: 29303816
[5]	吴茴, 李健慧, 邱萍, 等. 口腔短种植体长期修复效果的评估[J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2010, 45(12):712-716.
[6]	Hasan I, Heinemann F, Aitlahrach M, et al. Biomechanical finite element analysis of small diameter and short dental implant[J]. Biomed Tech(Berl), 2010, 55(6):341-350.
[7]	Bitaraf T, Keshtkar A, Rokn AR, et al. Comparing short dental implant and standard dental implant in terms of marginal bone level changes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2019, 21(4):796-812.
[8]	Quirynen M, Al-Nawas B, Meijer HJ, et al. Small-diameter titaniumGrade IV and titanium-zirconium implants in edentulous mandibles: Three-year results from a double-blind, randomized controlled trial[J]. Clin Oral Implants Res, 2015, 26(7):831-840. doi: 10.1111/clr.2015.26.issue-7
[9]	Barrak F, Li S, Muntane A, et al. Particle release from dental implants immediately after placement-An ex vivo comparison of different implant systems[J]. Dent Mater, 2022, 38(6):1004-1014. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2022.04.003 pmid: 35461699
[10]	Sharma A, Waddell JN, Li KC, et al. Is titanium-zirconium alloy a better alternative to pure titanium for oral implant?Composition, mechanical properties, and microstructure analysis[J]. Saudi Dent J, 2021, 33(7):546-553. doi: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2020.08.009
[11]	Yoshinari M. Future prospects of zirconia for oral implants-A review[J]. Dent Mater J, 2020, 39(1):37-45. doi: 10.4012/dmj.2019-151 pmid: 31666487
[12]	Al-Rabab'ah M, Hamadneh W, Alsalem I, et al. Use of High performance polymers as dental implant abutments and frameworks: A case series report[J]. J Prosthodont, 2019, 28(4):365-372. doi: 10.1111/jopr.12639 pmid: 28513977
[13]	白涧飞. 接枝成骨基因缓释涂层的PEEK种植材料在体内的成骨活性研究[D]. 长春: 吉林大学, 2021.
[14]	de Matos JDM, Lopes GDRS, Nakano LJN, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of 3-unit fixed partial dentures on monotype and two-piece zirconia dental implants[J]. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin, 2022, 25(3):239-246. doi: 10.1080/10255842.2021.1946798
[15]	Mezzomo LA, Corso L, Marczak RJ, et al. Three-dimensional FEA of effects of two dowel-and-core approaches and effects of canal flaring on stress distribution in endodontically treated teeth[J]. J Prosthodont, 2011, 20(2):120-129. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2010.00669.x pmid: 21284758
[16]	Eskitascioglu G, Usumez A, Sevimay M, et al. The influence of occlusal loading location on stresses transferred to implant-supported prostheses and supporting bone: A three-dimensional finite element study[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2004, 91(2):144-150. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2003.10.018 pmid: 14970760
[17]	Sarot JR, Contar CM, Cruz AC, et al. Evaluation of the stress distribution in CFR-PEEK dental implants by the three-dimensional finite element method[J]. J Mater Sci Mater Med, 2010, 21(7):2079-2085. doi: 10.1007/s10856-010-4084-7
[18]	周海兰. 多孔表层Ti2448种植体在颌骨内应力分布的研究[D]. 遵义: 遵义医科大学, 2021.
[19]	林逸凌, 邢辉, 董安平, 等. 不同弹性模量的基台-种植体组合对周围成骨性能的影响[J]. 工程科学学报, 2019, 41(6):781-787.
[20]	张雨晗, 谢伟丽. 不同长度种植体支持单端固定桥的三维有限元分析[J]. 哈尔滨医科大学学报, 2021, 55(6):574-578.
[21]	牛文芝, 袁媛, 刘宗响, 等. 不同颈部螺纹设计种植体周围牙槽骨应力分布的三维有限元分析[J]. 临床口腔医学杂志, 2017, 33(5):262-265.
[22]	Aslam A, Hassan SH, Aslam HM, et al. Effect of platform switching on peri-implant bone: A 3D finite element analysis[J]. J Prosthet Dent, 2019, 121(6):935-940. doi: S0022-3913(18)30687-5 pmid: 30711297
[23]	Hof M, Pommer B, Zukic N, et al. Influence of prosthetic parameters on peri-implant bone resorption in the first year of loading: a multi-factorial analysis[J]. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 2015, 17(Suppl 1):e183-191. doi: 10.1111/cid.2015.17.issue-s1
[24]	Saravana Kumar G, George SP. Optimization of custom cementless stem using finite element analysis and elastic modulus distribution for reducing stress-shielding effect[J]. Proc Inst Mech Eng H, 2017, 231(2):149-159. doi: 10.1177/0954411916686125
[25]	Jee WSS, Tian XY, Setterberg RB. Cancellous bone minimodeling-based formation: a Frost, Takahashi legacy[J]. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact, 2007, 7(3):232-239.

材料	弹性模量/MPa	泊松比
皮质骨^[14]	13 700	0.30
松质骨^[14]	1 370	0.30
种植冠^[15]	69 000	0.30
ZrO^[14]	210 000	0.30
Ti-Zr^[16]	110 000	0.35
CFR-PEEK^[17]	18 000	0.39

模型	单元数	节点数
牙冠	52 658	11 082
种植体	63 647	12 473
皮质骨	10 581	2 352
松质骨	57 275	11 086

应力	模型	ZrO	Ti-Zr	CFR-PEEK
轴向最大主应力	种植体	28.21	24.56	24.73
	皮质骨	14.27	13.40	8.06
	松质骨	0.862 3	0.864 7	0.857 6
轴向最小主应力	种植体	1.27	1.14	1.21
	皮质骨	5.79	1.51	1.57
	松质骨	0.364 7	0.364 8	0.364 9
轴向Von-Mises应力	种植体	28.21	24.56	21.27
	皮质骨	8.30	7.81	7.61
	松质骨	0.653 9	0.628 9	0.628 8
斜向Von-Mises应力	种植体	106.50	107.81	105.23
	皮质骨	27.17	27.56	26.78
	松质骨	1.895 2	1.835 0	1.866 9