ArticleThe journal of advanced prosthodontics2020
Biomechanical stress and microgap analysis of bone-level and tissue-level implant abutment structure according to the five different directions of occlusal loads.
Article in The journal of advanced prosthodontics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of Implant Design on Fracture Resistance, Mode, and Crystal Structure of One- and Two-Piece Zirconia Implants With Ceramic or Titanium Abutment Screws: An In Vitro Study.Clinical oral implants research · 2026Article
- Stress evaluation in one-piece and bone- or tissue-level two-piece zirconia dental implants with ceramic or titanium abutment screws: a finite element analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Effect of internal connection parameters on the fatigue limit of narrow-diameter implants - a finite element study.Journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Influence of Conventional and Innovative Abutment Designs and Retention Mechanisms on the Biomechanics and Microgap Pattern: A 3D Finite Element Analysis.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparison of implant placement at crestal and subcrestal levels in aesthetic zone: A finite element analysis.Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2026Article
- Biomechanical Effects of Platform Diameter and Screw Length in an Abutment-Free Tissue-Level Implant System Compared with a Ti-Base Configuration: 3D Finite Element Analysis.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Influence of misfit direction and abutment type on torque loss and fracture strength of implant-supported fixed dental prostheses.The journal of advanced prosthodontics · 2025Article
- A New Multi-Axial Functional Stress Analysis Assessing the Longevity of a Ti-6Al-4V Dental Implant Abutment Screw.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Influence of a new abutment design concept on the biomechanics of peri-implant bone, implant components, and microgap formation: a finite element analysis.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Application in the analysis of the occlusal force of free-end missing tooth implant restoration with T-SCAN III.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
- Fractal Dimension as a Tool for Assessment of Dental Implant Stability-A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe stress distribution and microgap formation on an implant abutment structure was evaluated to determine the relationship between the direction of the load and the stress value. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwo types of three-dimensional models for the mandibular first molar were designed: bone-level implant and tissue-level implant. Each group consisted of an implant, surrounding bone, abutment, screw, and crown. Static finite element analysis was simulated through 200 N of occlusal load and preload at five different load directions: 0, 15, 30, 45, and 60°. The von Mises stress of the abutment and implant was evaluated. Microgap formation on the implant-abutment interface was also analyzed.
resultsThe stress values in the implant were as follows: 525, 322, 561, 778, and 1150 MPa in a bone level implant, and 254, 182, 259, 364, and 436 MPa in a tissue level implant at a load direction of 0, 15, 30, 45, and 60°, respectively. For microgap formation between the implant and abutment interface, three to seven-micron gaps were observed in the bone level implant under a load at 45 and 60°. In contrast, a three-micron gap was observed in the tissue level implant under a load at only 60°.
conclusionThe mean stress of bone-level implant showed 2.2 times higher than that of tissue-level implant. When considering the loading point of occlusal surface and the direction of load, higher stress was noted when the vector was from the center of rotation in the implant prostheses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.