ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental dentistry2023
Comparative analysis of biomechanical response between zygomatic implant and Facco technique through the three-dimensional finite element method.
Article in Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: The placement of zygomatic implants is an alternative used for rehabilitation of edentulous patients with atrophic maxilla. However, the complexity of the various techniques suggested in the literature requires high skill from surgeons. Aim: The objective of this research was to compare the biomechanical performance of traditional technique of zygomatic implant placement in relation to a new proposal, the Facco technique, through finite element analysis. Material and Methods: A three-dimensional geometric model of the maxilla was input into computer-aided design software (Rhinoceros version 4.0 SR8). STL file of the geometric models of implants and components supplied by the company Implacil De Bortoli was converted to volumetric solids through reverse engineering by RhinoResurf software (Rhinoceros version 4.0 SR8). Three groups were modeled: traditional technique, Facco technique without frictional contact and Facco technique with frictional contact, following the recommended position in each technique for implant placement. All models received a maxillary bar. Groups were exported to the computer-aided engineering software ANYSYS 19.2, in step format. Mechanical static structural analysis was requested with occlusal load of 120N. All elements were considered isotropic, homogeneous, and linearly elastic. Contacts were considered ideal and system fixation was considered at the bone tissue base. Results: There is similarity between the techniques. Microdeformation values capable of generating undesirable bone resorption were not observed in both techniques. Highest values in the posterior region of Facco technique were computed at the angle of part B close to the posterior implant. Conclusions: Biomechanical behaviors of the two evaluated zygomatic implant techniques are similar. Prosthetic abutment (pilar Z) modifies the distribution of stresses over the zygomatic implant body. Highest stress peak was found in the pilar Z, but it is within acceptable physiological limits.
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.