ArticleClinical and experimental dental research2025
Stress Distribution Pattern in Mandibular Overdenture Designs Supported by Three Dental Implants: A 3D Finite Element Analysis.
Article in Clinical and experimental dental research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of Various Implant Placement Strategies on Stress Distribution in Maxillary Implant-Retained Overdenture: A 3D Finite-Element Analysis.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2026Article
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe purpose of this study was to assess the implant-supported overdenture stress distribution pattern in cancellous and cortical bone, dental implants, and prosthetic components, and its displacement by using finite element analysis (FEA). MATERIALS AND
methodsAn edentulous model of the mandible was designed with three dental implants placed at the sites of canine teeth and the midline. Six groups were designed with isolated (ball and locator) and splinted (conventional bar and a CAD/CAM milled bar with cast and screw ball) attachments with and without a cantilever using SolidWorks 2022 software. The stress distribution pattern in the surrounding bone, implants, and prosthetic components (attachments, caps, housings, and screws) was evaluated following the application of 150 N force vertically and 105 N load with a 30° angle relative to the first molar site using Abaqus/CAE 2021 software. The implant-supported overdenture displacement was also evaluated.
resultsThe ball attachment caused the highest stress in the attachments (363 and 896 MPa) and housings (375 and 1187 MPa) under vertical and oblique loadings, and cancellous bone (6 MPa under vertical loading). The pattern of stress distribution was variable following vertical and oblique loading in the cortical bone and dental implants in different groups. The locator attachment resulted in lower stress distribution in bone, implants, and prosthetic components. In splinted groups, the cantilever designs caused lower stress in bone, implants, and prosthetic components in comparison with designs without a cantilever. The conventional and milled bar did not show any mechanical difference.
conclusionConsidering the stress distribution patterns, the locator attachment is preferred to the ball isolated attachment, and the cantilever design is preferred among the splinted types. Isolated attachments were more effective in controlling the displacement. Also, conventional and milled bars did not show any superiority over each other.
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.