Finite element analysis of narrow dental implants.

Narrow-diameter implants (NDIs) traditionally have been associated to higher rates of failure in comparison with regular-diameter implants (RDIs) and wide-diameter implants (WDIs), since they generate a more unfavorable stress distribution in peri-implant bone. However, it is well known that the load sharing effect associated with prostheses supported by multiple implants (also called splinted prostheses) affords mechanical benefits. The present study involves finite element analysis (FEA) to determine whether the risks linked to NDIs could be mitigated by the mechanical advantages afforded by the splinting concept. For this purpose, a three-dimensional (3D) model of a real maxilla was reconstructed from computed tomography (CT) images, and different implants (NDIs, RDIs and WDIs) and prostheses were created using computer-aided design (CAD) tools. Biting forces were simulated on the prostheses corresponding to three different rehabilitation solutions: single-implant restoration, three-unit bridge and all-on-four treatment. Stress distribution around the implants was calculated, and overloading in bone was quantified within peri-implant volumes enclosed by cylinders with a diameter 0.1mm greater than that of each implant. The mechanical benefits of the splinting concept were confirmed: the peri-implant overloaded volume around NDIs splinted by means of the three-unit bridge was significantly reduced in comparison with the nonsplinted condition and, most importantly, proved even smaller than that around nonsplinted implants with a larger diameter (RDIs). However, splinted NDIs supporting the all-on-four prosthesis led to the highest risk of overloading found in the study, due to the increase in compressive stress generated around the tilted implant when loading the cantilevered molar.

Aesthetic perception of single implants placed in the anterior zone. A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Several aesthetic indexes have been described to assess implant aesthetics. The aim of this study was to compare the aesthetic assessment made by dental professionals and students of single-tooth implants placed in the upper incisors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional survey study using a subjective questionnaire to assess the aesthetics in 3 implant supported single-tooth cases in the anterior maxilla was performed. The interviewed subjects were divided into 4 groups: dentist with experience in implant treatment, dentists without experience in implants and 3rd and 5th year dental students. The questionnaire consisted of 2 visual analogue scales (VAS) to evaluate aesthetics, the pink esthetic score (PES), the white esthetic score (WES) and the simplified papilla index (PI). RESULTS: One-hundred dentists and one-hundred dental students filled the aesthetic assessment questionnaire. The results showed that the subjects were more critical than reference values, specially concerning prosthetic issues. The differences between groups were more obvious in the case with the best result. On the other hand, few differences were detected in the remaining cases. Regarding soft tissue and crown features, experienced dentists in implant dentistry were the most demanding. Cronbach's Alpha showed values ≥ 0,8 in the questionnaire in every case, which indicates an adequate reliability. CONCLUSIONS: Dentists and dental students have different opinions when assessing aesthetics of single tooth implant supported cases. Experience and area of expertise seem to influence the evaluation of aesthetics in the anterior region.