Comparing the influence of crestal cortical bone and sinus floor cortical bone in posterior maxilla bi-cortical dental implantation: A three-dimensional finite element analysis

References

• Ahn SJ, Leesungbok R, Lee SW, Heo YK, Kang KL. Differences in implant stability associated with various methods of preparation of the implant bed: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2012;107:366–72.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Balshi TJ, Wolfinger GJ, Balshi SF2nd. Analysis of 356 pterygomaxillary implants in edentulous arches for fixed prosthesis anchorage. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1999;14:398–406.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Herrmann I, Lekholm U, Holm S, Kultje C. Evaluation of patient and implant characteristics as potential prognostic factors for oral implant failures. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005;20:220–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friberg B, Ekestubbe A, Sennerby L. Clinical outcome of Branemark System implants of various diameters: a retrospective study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2002;17:671–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Crespi R, Cappare P, Gherlone E. Osteotome sinus floor elevation and simultaneous implant placement in grafted biomaterial sockets: 3 years of followup. J Periodontol 2010;81:344–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nedir R, Bischof M, Vazquez L, Nurdin N, SzmuklerMoncler S, Bernard JP. Osteotome sinus floor elevation technique without grafting material: 3 year results of a prospective pilot study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:701–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nedir R, Nurdin N, Szmukler-Moncler S, Bischof M. Placement of tapered implants using an osteotome sinus floor elevation technique without bone grafting: 1-year results. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:727–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ivanoff CJ, Grondahl K, Bergstrom C, Lekholm U, Branemark PI. Influence of bicortical or monocortical anchorage on maxillary implant stability: a 15-year retrospective study of Branemark System implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2000;15:103–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee JH, Frias V, Lee KW, Wright RF. Effect of implant size and shape on implant success rates: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent 2005;94:377–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lum LB. A biomechanical rationale for the use of short implants. J Oral Implantol 1991;17:126–31.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Geng JP, Tan KB, Liu GR. Application of finite element analysis in implant dentistry: a review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2001;85:585–98.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okumura N, Stegaroiu R, Kitamura E, Kurokawa K, Nomura S. Influence of maxillary cortical bone thickness, implant design and implant diameter on stress around implants: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Prosthodont Res 2010;54:133–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiao JR, Li YQ, Guan SM, Kong L, Liu B, Li D. Effects of lateral cortical anchorage on the primary stability of implants subjected to controlled loads: an in vitro study. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;50:161–5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wang K, Li DH, Guo JF, Liu BL, Shi SQ. Effects of buccal bi-cortical anchorages on primary stability of dental implants: a numerical approach of natural frequency analysis. J Oral Rehabil 2009;36:284–91.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Van Staden RC, Guan H, Loo YC. Application of the finite element method in dental implant research. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 2006;9:257–70.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Li T, Yang X, Zhang D, Zhou H, Shao J, Ding Y, et al. Analysis of the biomechanical feasibility of a wide implant in moderately atrophic maxillary sinus region with finite element method. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2012;114:e1–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schuller-Gotzburg P, Entacher K, Petutschnigg A, Pomwenger W, Watzinger F. Sinus elevation with a cortical bone graft block: a patient-specific three-dimensional finite element study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2012;27:359–68.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gabbert O, Koob A, Schmitter M, Rammelsberg P. Implants placed in combination with an internal sinus lift without graft material: an analysis of short-term failure. J Clin Periodontol 2009;36:177–83.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tabassum A, Meijer GJ, Wolke JG, Jansen JA. Influence of the surgical technique and surface roughness on the primary stability of an implant in artificial bone with a density equivalent to maxillary bone: a laboratory study. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:327–32.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chang PC, Lang NP, Giannobile WV. Evaluation of functional dynamics during osseointegration and regeneration associated with oral implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010;21:1–12.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Huang HM, Lee SY, Yeh CY, Lin CT. Resonance frequency assessment of dental implant stability with various bone qualities: a numerical approach. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002;13:65–74.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pattijn V, Van Lierde C, Van der Perre G, Naert I, Vander Sloten J. The resonance frequencies and mode shapes of dental implants: rigid body behaviour versus bending behaviour. A numerical approach. J Biomech 2006;39:939–47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pommer B, Unger E, Suto D, Hack N, Watzek G. Mechanical properties of the Schneiderian membrane in vitro. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:633–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Underwood AS. An inquiry into the anatomy and pathology of the maxillary sinus. J Anat Physiol 1910;44:354–69.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ulm CW, Solar P, Gsellmann B, Matejka M, Watzek G. The edentulous maxillary alveolar process in the region of the maxillary sinus--a study of physical dimension. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1995;24:279–82.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• van den Bergh JP, ten Bruggenkate CM, Disch FJ, Tuinzing DB. Anatomical aspects of sinus floor elevations. Clin Oral Implants Res 2000;11:256–65.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gosau M, Rink D, Driemel O, Draenert FG. Maxillary sinus anatomy: a cadaveric study with clinical implications. Anat Rec (Hoboken) 2009;292:352–4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ding X, Zhu XH, Liao SH, Zhang XH, Chen H. Implant-bone interface stress distribution in immediately loaded implants of different diameters: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Prosthodont 2009;18:393–402.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Seoane J, Lopez-Nino J, Tomas I, Gonzalez-Mosquera A, Seoane-Romero J, Varela-Centelles P. Simulation for training in sinus floor elevation: new surgical bench model. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 2012;17:e605–9.
   Google Scholar
• Huang C, Chen L, Wu D, Chen Y. Finite element simulations of the contact stress between rotary sinus lift kit and sinus membrane during lifting process. Life Sci J 2012;9:167–71.
   Google Scholar
• Mellal A, Wiskott HW, Botsis J, Scherrer SS, Belser UC. Stimulating effect of implant loading on surrounding bone. Comparison of three numerical models and validation by in vivo data. Clin Oral Implants Res 2004;15:239–48.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morneburg TR, Proschel PA. Measurement of masticatory forces and implant loads: a methodologic clinical study. Int J Prosthodont 2002;15:20–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yan X, Zhang X, Gao J, Matsushita Y, Koyano K, Jiang X, et al. Maxillary sinus augmentation without grafting material with simultaneous implant installation: a three-dimensional finite element analysis. Clin Implant Dent Relat 2014. 10.1111/cid.12254.
   Google Scholar
• Akca K, Cehreli MC. Biomechanical consequences of progressive marginal bone loss around oral implants: a finite element stress analysis. Med Biol Eng Comput 2006;44:527–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okumura N, Stegaroiu R, Nishiyama H, Kurokawa K, Kitamura E, Hayashi T, et al. Finite element analysis of implant-embedded maxilla model from CT data: comparison with the conventional model. J Prosthodont Res 2011;55:24–31.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mericske-Stern R, Venetz E, Fahrlander F, Burgin W. In vivo force measurements on maxillary implants supporting a fixed prosthesis or an overdenture: a pilot study. J Prosthet Dent 2000;84:535–47.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Morneburg TR, Proschel PA. In vivo forces on implants influenced by occlusal scheme and food consistency. Int J Prosthodont 2003;16:481–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han XL, Liu ZW, Li YT. [Three dimensional finite element analysis of biomechanical distribution of dental implants with immediate loading]. Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi. Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi. West China J Stomatol 2011;29:121–4.
   Google Scholar
• I-Chiang C, Shyh-Yuan L, Ming-Chang W, Sun CW, Jiang CP. Finite element modelling of implant designs and cortical bone thickness on stress distribution in maxillary type IV bone. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 2014;17:516–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sennerby L, Roos J. Surgical determinants of clinical success of osseointegrated oral implants: a review of the literature. Int J Prosthodont 1998;11:408–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Su YY, Wilmes B, Honscheid R, Drescher D. Application of a wireless resonance frequency transducer to assess primary stability of orthodontic mini-implants: an in vitro study in pig ilia. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2009;24:647–54.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roze J, Babu S, Saffarzadeh A, Gayet-Delacroix M, Hoornaert A, Layrolle P. Correlating implant stability to bone structure. Clin Oral Implants Res 2009;20:1140–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar