Simamoto Júnior Paulo Cézar, da Silva-Neto João Paulo, Novais Veridiana Resende, de Arruda Nóbilo Mauro Antônio, das Neves Flávio Domingues, Araujo Cleudmar Amaral
*Adjunct Professor, Department of Occlusion, Fixed Prostheses, and Dental materials, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil. †Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil. ‡Adjunct Professor, Department of Operative Dentistry and Dental materials, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil. §Titular Professor, Piracicaba Dental School, Department of Prosthodontics and Periodontics, University of Campinas, Piracicaba, Brazil. ‖Associate Professor, Department of Occlusion, Fixed Prostheses, and Dental materials, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil. ¶Professor, Mechanical Projects Laboratory, Mechanical Engineering School, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil.
Implant Dent. 2014 Dec;23(6):704-9. doi: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000170.
To observe the photoelastic stress patterns generated around implants in relation to variations in the diameter and total number of implants supporting fixed complete-arch mandibular frameworks.
Three different implant configurations were analyzed (n = 3): 5 standard implants with diameters of 3.75 mm (C), 3 standard implants with diameters of 3.75 mm (3S), and 3 wide implants with diameters of 5.0 mm (3W). The samples were subjected to a vertical compressive load (1.33 kgf) applied at the end of the distal cantilever of the framework. The shear stresses were calculated around the implants, and the data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance.
The implants nearest to the loading showed higher stress values regardless of the group. The C group showed lower shear stress when compared with the other groups (P = 0.001). No significant difference was observed between the 3W and 3S groups (P = 0.785).
A reduction in the number of implants, regardless of the implant diameter, showed higher stress concentration around the implants. Five-implant configuration showed lower stress concentration and seems to be more biomechanically predictable.
观察种植体周围产生的光弹性应力模式，以了解支持固定全牙弓下颌骨框架的种植体直径和总数变化的情况。
分析三种不同的种植体配置（n = 3）：5颗直径为3.75 mm的标准种植体（C组）、3颗直径为3.75 mm的标准种植体（3S组）和3颗直径为5.0 mm的宽种植体（3W组）。样本在框架远端悬臂末端施加垂直压缩载荷（1.33 kgf）。计算种植体周围的剪应力，并使用单因素方差分析对数据进行分析。
无论哪一组，最靠近加载部位的种植体显示出更高的应力值。与其他组相比，C组的剪应力较低（P = 0.001）。3W组和3S组之间未观察到显著差异（P = 0.785）。
无论种植体直径如何，种植体数量减少会导致种植体周围应力集中更高。五种植体配置显示出较低的应力集中，似乎在生物力学上更具可预测性。
