상악 임플란트 overdenture에서 anchorage system과 의치상 구개피개가 하중전달에 미치는 영향

제홍지; 전유진; 전윤경; 임장섭; 황재석

SITE LINK

상악 임플란트 overdenture에서 anchorage system과 의치상 구개피개가 하중전달에 미치는 영향
EFFECT OF ANCHORAGE SYSTEMS AND PALATAL COVERAGE OF DENTURE BASE ON LOAD TRANSFER WITH MAXILLARY IMPLANT-SUPPORTING OVERDENTURES : A THREE-DIMENSIONAL PHOTOELASTIC STRESS ANALYSIS

대한치과보철학회지 2004년 42권 4호 p.397 ~ 411

제홍지, 전유진, 전윤경, 임장섭, 황재석,

소속 상세정보

제홍지 ( Je Hong-Ji ) - 부산대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실
전유진 ( Jeon You-Jin ) - 부산대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실
전윤경 ( Jeon Yun-Kyung ) - 부산대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실
임장섭 ( Lim Jang-Seop ) - 부산대학교 치과대학 치과보철학교실
황재석 ( Hwang Jai-Sug ) - 영남대학교 공과대학 기계공학과

KMID : 0362420040420040397

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of anchorage systems and palatal coverage of denture base on load transfer in maxillary implant-supported overdenture.

Material and Methods: Maxillary implant-supported overdentures in which 4 implants were placed in the anterior region of edentulous maxilla were fabricated, and stress distribution patterns in implant supporting bone in the case of unilateral vertical loading on maxillary right first molar were compared with each other depending on various types of anchorage system and palatal coverage extent of denture base using three-dimensional photoelastic stress analysis. Two photoelastic overdenture models were fabricated in each anchorage system to compare with the palatal coverage extent of denture base, as a result we got eight models : Hader bar using clips(type 1), cantilevered Hader bar using clips(type 2), Hader bar using clip and ERA attachments(type 3), cantilevered milled-bar using swivel-latchs and frictional pins(type 4).
Result: 1. In all experimental models, the highest stress was concentrated on the most distal implant supporting bone on loaded side. 2. In every experimental models with or without palatal coverage of denture base, maximum fringe orders on the distal ipsilateral implant supporting bone in an ascending order is as follows; type 3, type 1, type 4, and type 2. 3. Each implants showed compressive stresses in all experimental models with palatal coverage of denture base, but in the case of those without palatal coverage of denture base, tensile stresses were observed in the distal contralateral implant supporting bone. 4. In all anchorage system without palatal coverage of denture base, higher stresses were concentrated on the most distal implant supporting bone on loaded side. 5. The type of anchorage system affected in load transfer more than palatal coverage extent of the denture base.

Conclusion: To the results mentioned above, in the case of patients with unfavorable biomechanical conditions such as not sufficient number of supporting implants, short length of the implant, and poor bone quality, selecting a resilient type attachment or minimizing the distal cantilevered bar is considered to be an appropriate method to prevent overloading on implants by reducing cantilever effect and gaining more support from the distal residual ridge.