ArticleFrontiers in genetics2022
Biomechanical Comparison of Six Different Root-Analog Implants and the Conventional Morse Taper Implant by Finite Element Analysis.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Parametric Design of Porous Structure and Optimal Porosity Gradient Distribution Based on Root-Shaped Implants.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The optimal design and three-dimensional finite element analysis of CAD/CAM integrated roach attachment.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Taper implants differ greatly from anatomical teeth in shape. In this study, seven three-dimensional finite element models were established, including a conventional taper implant and six root-analog implants with different root numbers and shapes. Vertical, horizontal, and oblique instantaneous loads of 100 N were applied to the models to obtain stress distribution in the implant, mucosa, cortical bone, and cancellous bone. ANSYS was used to perform the analysis under hypothetical experimental conditions. We find the stresses in all the implants and surrounding tissues varied by loading direction, the sequence of stress magnitude is vertical load, oblique load, and then horizontal load. The maximum stress values in root-analog implants were significantly less than in the taper implant. Moreover, stress distribution in the former was equalized contrary to the concentrated stress in the latter. Root-analog implants with different root geometry also revealed a pattern: stresses in multiple-root implant models were lower than those in single-root implants under the same load. The implant with a long and rounded root distributed the stress more uniformly, and it was mainly concentrated on the implant itself and cancellous bone. However, the opposite effect was observed in the short implant on mucosa and cortical bone. The root geometry of anatomical teeth can modify their functions. A uniform-shaped implant can hardly meet their functional requirements. Thus, the root-analog implant could be a possible solution.
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.