ArticleInternational journal of medical sciences2024
Evaluation of Different Subperiosteal Implant Thicknesses on Mechanical Strength and Stress on Bone by Finite Element Analysis.
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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient-Specific Subperiosteal Implants for Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review Across Indications, from Established Full-Arch Use to Emerging Single-Tooth and Oncologic Applications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Biomechanical comparison of titanium and Y-TZP subperiosteal implants in atrophic maxilla: a finite element study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Biomechanical effect of implant thickness and screw diameter on CFR-PEEK subperiosteal implants: a three-dimensional finite element analysis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Biomechanical evaluation of prosthetic framework materials in subperiosteal implants: a finite element analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Impact of framework material, cantilever design, and wing configuration on stress distribution in patient specific additively manufactured subperiosteal jaw implants: a 3D finite element analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Indications and Complications of Subperiosteal Implants: Literature Review and Case Series.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- Article
- Finite Element Analysis of Functionally Loaded Subperiosteal Implants Evaluated on a Realistic Model Reproducing Severe Atrophic Jaws.Methods and protocols · 2025Article
- Comparison of Screws with Different Diameters in Subperiosteal Implant Application with Finite Element Analysis.International journal of medical sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.