임프란트로 지지된 하악 켄티레버 보철물의 3차원 유한요소 분석

조철; 신상완; 권종진

SITE LINK

임프란트로 지지된 하악 켄티레버 보철물의 3차원 유한요소 분석
THREE DIMENSIONAL FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS ON THE MANDIBULAR CANTILEVERED PROSTHESIS SUPPORTED BY IMPLANTS

대한치과보철학회지 2000년 38권 5호 p.724 ~ 743

조철, 신상완, 권종진,

소속 상세정보

조철 ( Cho Chul ) - 고려대학교 의과대학 치과학교실
신상완 ( Shin Sang-Wan ) - 고려대학교 의과대학 치과학교실
권종진 ( Kwon Jong-Jin ) - 고려대학교 의과대학 치과학교실

KMID : 0362420000380050724

Abstract

One of the biggest clinical problems of osseointegrated implant prosthesis is the excessive stress caused by bite forces which are transfered directly into the bone through the osseointegrated implant fixtures. So several biodynamic problems occur when there is an excessive fatigue stress. The factors of stress distribution are the number, kind, position, arrangement of the implants, and the distance between the implants, and the kind, quality of superstructure prosthesis and connection type between the rest implant and the superstructure. Recently, a distal short additional implant, socalled rest implant, is employed to reduced the stresses in conventional cantilevered prostheses. This study was undertaken to analyze the stresses transfered by osseointegrated implant cantilevered prostheses depending upon the number and the position of implants, the presence of rest implant, and the type of their connection. Three dimensional finite element analysis was attempted using ANSIS ver. 5.3 program under IBM INDIGO computer. The results were as follows 1. The rest implant influenced on the pattern of stress distribution on the anterior area of the mandible and the superstructure. 2. In the group employing the rest implants, the fixed type of connection between the rest implant and the superstructure was more stable than the ball attachment type on the stress distribution. 3. In the group employing the ball attachment between the rest implant and the superstructure, the case with 4-implants(on canine, premolar) was little more stable than the case with 6-implants and the case with 4-implants (on incisor, premolar) on the stress distribution. 4. In the cantilevered group, the case with 4-implants(on incisor, premolar) and the case with 6-implants were more stable than the case with 4-implants (on canine, premolar) on the stress distribution. 5. In all of the group, the case with 6-implants and the fixed type of connection was the most stable and the case with 4-implants (on canine, premolar) was the most unstable on the stress distribution.