Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38515128›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2024

Finite element analysis of stress distribution on residual root structure in socket shield procedure following immediate dental implant placement: an in vitro study.

Aniket Shinde, V N V Madhav, Ravinder S Saini, Vishwanath Gurumurthy, Rayan Ibrahim H Binduhayyim, Seyed Ali Mosaddad, Artak Heboyan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Aniket ShindePrivate Practice, Pune, India.
V N V MadhavDepartment of Prosthodontics, YCMM and RDF's Dental College & Hospital, 166/1, Vadgaon Gupta, Opp MIDC, Ahmednagar, Maharashtra, 414003, India.
Ravinder S SainiDepartment of Dental Technology, COAMS, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Vishwanath GurumurthyDepartment of Dental Technology, COAMS, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Rayan Ibrahim H BinduhayyimDepartment of Dental Technology, COAMS, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Seyed Ali MosaddadDepartment of Research Analytics, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha University, Chennai, India. mosaddad.sa@gmail.com.
Artak HeboyanDepartment of Research Analytics, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha Dental College and Hospitals, Saveetha University, Chennai, India. heboyan.artak@gmail.com.
King Khalid University · SASaveetha University · INDr. R. Ahmed Dental College and Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe success of implants in the socket shield technique relies on stress experienced by root fragments within the socket. Although there is no consensus on optimal root fragment thickness, varying thicknesses and dynamic implant placement induce stress in various directions and degrees. This study aimed to assess biomechanical response and stress distribution across different root fragment thicknesses in the socket shield procedure.

methodsThis in vitro study was conducted to assess and compare the stress distribution on residual root structures of varying thicknesses positioned within the labial aspect of the maxillary incisor socket during immediate implant placement of standard dimensions. The procedure involved applying an insertional torque of 40 Ncm, and the analysis was conducted using finite element analysis software.

resultsUtilizing the Numerical Technique with Abaqus software for explicit dynamics, von Mises stress and principal strain were analyzed on the root structure and bone under nonlinear contact conditions during implant torque application. For Model A, a loading torque of 40 Ncm was applied vertically on the implant, along with a horizontal force of 20 N on the root structure and bone. Results indicated maximum stress of 12.68 MPa on the root structure with a thickness of 0.5 mm and 5.61 MPa on the bone, with principal strains of 6.82E-03 and 4.10E-03, respectively. In Model B, with a root structure thickness of 1.0 mm, the maximum stress increased to 19.70 MPa, while the bone stress rose to 9.51 MPa, with principal strains of 1.03E-02 and 6.09E-03. Model C, with a root structure thickness of 1.5 mm, exhibited a maximum stress of 21.58 MPa on the root and 10.12 MPa on the bone, with principal strains of 1.16E-02 and 6.10E-03. Lastly, in Model D, with a root structure thickness of 2.0 mm, the maximum stress on the root structure and bone escalated to 28.74 MPa and 11.38 MPa, respectively, with principal strains of 1.55E-02 and 8.31E-03.

conclusionsAs the thickness of the shield increases (ranging from 0.5 to 2 mm) in socket shield procedures with immediate implant placement, both stress on the root fragment and bone and principal micro-strain escalate. However, employing a shield thickness within the range of 0.5 to 2 mm does not lead to any adverse stress generation on the residual root fragment. However, for enhanced safety, it is recommended to restrict the maximum diameter and extension of the root fragment to 1.5 mm when considering implant sizes and socket diameter for the socket shield technique.

Indexed as

Dental ImplantsDental Implants, Single-ToothImmediate Dental Implant LoadingDental Stress AnalysisFinite Element AnalysisHumansTooth SocketDental ImplantsDental implantsFinite elementResidual root structureSocket shield techniqueStress

Identifiers

PMID38515128
PMCPMC10958881
OpenAlexW4393037532

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.