ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Finite Element Analysis of Dental Implants with Zirconia Crown Restorations: Conventional Cement-Retained vs. Cementless Screw-Retained.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stress distribution in angulated bendable one-piece and two-piece implant-supported single crowns in the posterior maxilla: a finite element analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Finite Element Analysis of Peri-Implant Stress in Maxillary All-on-Four Rehabilitation: Effects of Posterior Implant Angulation and Loading Protocol.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
- 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
- Article
- Influence of different customized abutment materials on stress distribution of different internal implant-abutment connections: finite element analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- A Preliminary Randomized Trial on the Efficiency and Clinical Value of a Cementless Screw-Retained Implant Workflow in Single-Implant Restorations.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Stress Assessment of Abutment-Free and Three Implant-Abutment Connections Utilizing Various Abutment Materials: A 3D Finite Element Study of Static and Cyclic Static Loading Conditions.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Two-Phase Material Shape Optimization of an Additively Manufactured Integrated Metal and Ceramic Resin Implant-Supported Dental Crown.International journal for numerical methods in biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Biomechanical comparison of various implant inclinations and abutment types in a bendable implant system.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Stress Distribution on Endodontically Treated Anterior Teeth Restored via Different Ceramic Materials with Varying Post Lengths Versus Endocrown-A 3D Finite Element Analysis.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Comparative Biomechanical Evaluation of Novel Screwless Retained Dental Implant Prosthesis: A 3D Finite Element Analysis.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- The Influence of Cement Thickness within the Cap on Stress Distribution for Dental Implants.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024Article
- Article
- Stress Concentration of Endodontically Treated Molars Restored with Transfixed Glass Fiber Post: 3D-Finite Element Analysis.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study was designed to compare the stress distributions in two restoration types of implants and the surrounding bone. The first restoration type was a conventional cement-retained zirconia crown, and the second was a novel cementless screw-retained zirconia crown with a base abutment. A three-dimensional finite element method was used to model the implants, restorations, and supporting bone. A comparative study of the two implants was performed under two masticatory loads: a vertical load of 100 N and a 30-degree oblique load of 100 N. Under both loading conditions, the maximum von Mises stress and strain values in the implant and supporting bone were higher in the conventional cement-retained restoration model than in the cementless screw-retained model. In terms of stress distribution, the cementless screw-retained zirconia crown with base abutment may be considered a superior restoration option compared to the conventional cement-retained zirconia crown.
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.