Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39006845›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of medical sciences2024

Evaluation of Different Subperiosteal Implant Thicknesses on Mechanical Strength and Stress on Bone by Finite Element Analysis.

Abdulsamet Kundakcioglu, Mustafa Ayhan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of medical sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

2 authors.

Abdulsamet KundakciogluIstanbul University Faculty of Dental Medicine Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Istanbul, Turkey.
Mustafa AyhanIstanbul University Faculty of Dental Medicine Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Istanbul, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Implants have always been within the interest of both clinicians and material scientists due to their places in reconstructive and prosthetics surgery. Excessive bone loss or resorption in some patients makes it difficult to design and manufacture the implants that bear the necessary loads to carry the final prosthetics. With this study; we tried to determine the minimum material thickness of the subperiosteal implants that can withstand the physiological forces. We have created a digital average bone structure based on actual patient data and designed different subperiosteal implants with 1, 1.5, and 2mm material thicknesses (M1, M2, M3) for this digital model. The designed implant models are subjected to 250 Newtons (N) of force, and the implant and bone are tested for the stress they are exposed to, the pressure they transmit to, and their mechanical strength with Finite Element Analysis with the physical parameters boot for the implant material and human bone. Results show us that under specific design parameters and thicknesses, the 1mm thickness design failed due to exceeding the yield stress limit of 415MPa with a 495,44MPa value. The thinnest implant showed plastic deformation and transmitted excessive forces, which may cause bone resorption due to residual stress. We determined that thinner subperiosteal implants down to 1.5mm that have the necessary material parameters for function and tissue support can be designed and manufactured with current technologies.

Indexed as

Finite Element AnalysisStress, MechanicalBiomechanical PhenomenaBone and BonesHumansMaterials TestingProstheses and ImplantsBone ResorptionCustom Made ImplantSubperiosteal Implant

Identifiers

PMID39006845
PMCPMC11241093

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.