摘要
目的:在前端种植体固定桥和后端冠外弹性附着体义齿联合修复上颌无牙颌的修复设计中,比较不同种植体位置和数目的3个有限元模型的应力分布,选择一种更合理的修复设计。方法:建立4个种植体在双侧侧切牙和尖牙的三维有限元模型I,通过局部修改,建立2个种植体在双侧尖牙的模型II,4个种植体在双侧尖牙和中切牙的模型III。应力垂直加载于上颌右侧第一磨牙,加力300N,用MSC软件进行静态应力分析。结果:模型II中23种植体处的应力大约是模型I的3倍。模型III的附着体、23种植体和13种植体的应力比模型I和模型II明显高。然而,模型III中21种植体和11种植体的应力比模型I中22种植体和12种植体处的应力低。在模型III中,4个种植体的应力相差很大。结论:在3个模型中,4个种植体在双侧侧切牙和尖牙的模型I在生物力学方面是最合理的。
Objective: The aim of this study was to choose a kind of more reasonable design with different number and place of implants in anterior implant-supported fixed bridge and posterior attachment denture to restore maxillary edentulous jaw by comparing three models'three dimensional finite element stress analysis. Methods: Three dimensional finite element model were reconstructed, model Ⅰ with four implants in lateral incisors and canine teeth, model Ⅱ with two implants in canine teeth and model Ⅲ with four implants in central incisors and canine teeth. Static loading direction was 30° diagonal and vertical to buccal inclined surface of lingual cusp of the first molar. The force of 300N was loaded on buccal inclined surface of lingual cusp of the first molar. The results of stress were analyzed by MSC software. Results: The stress in #23 implant of model Ⅱ was about three times of model Ⅰ. The stress in attachments and #23 implant and #13 implant of model Ⅲ was significantly higher than that in model Ⅰ and model Ⅱ. However, the stress in #21 implant and #11 implant of model Ⅲ was relatively lower than that in #22 implant and #12 implant in model Ⅰ. In model Ⅲ, the stress in four implants was obviously different. Conclusion: The stresses of model Ⅰ with four implants in lateral incisors and canines were the most reasonable in oral biomechanics.
出处
《口腔颌面修复学杂志》
2008年第2期131-134,共4页
Chinese Journal of Prosthodontics
关键词
种植体
附着体
三维有限元分析
上颔
无牙颌
implant
attachment, three dimensional finite element stress analysis
maxilla
edentulousjaws