ArticleBMC oral health2025
Analysis of optimizing Bicon short implant placement in posterior mandible with type II bone.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. 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
backgroundDental implantation has emerged as the predominant approach for the replacement of missing teeth. Nevertheless, the resorption of alveolar bone occurs progressively following tooth loss, leading to varying perspectives regarding the application of bone augmentation techniques for standard-length implants versus the direct utilization of shorter implants. This study employs finite element analysis (FEA) to assess a typical Bicon short implant system, with the objective of determining the most effective implant for the posterior mandibular region with type II bone.
methodsEight three-dimensional finite element models were developed using three different diameters of Bicon implants (4.5 mm, 5 mm, and 6 mm) and three varying lengths (5 mm, 6 mm, and 8 mm). Each model comprised an implant-restoration system along with an alveolar bone block. Following the assembly of these components, vertical loads of 100 N and inclined loads of 50 N were applied to analyze the stress distribution within the implant-restoration system under both static and cyclic loading conditions.
resultsStatic analysis revealed that local stress increases within the Bicon implant-restoration system manifest at several critical interfaces. These included the contact zones between the bite force and the crown, the crown and the abutment, the abutment and the inner edge of the implant, as well as the outer edge of the implant and the alveolar bone. Furthermore, dynamic and fatigue analyses corroborated the stress distribution patterns observed in the static analysis across each abutment-implant complex. The highest concentration of stress was located beneath the hemispherical base of the abutment, extending to the interface between the abutment and the implant. Despite theoretically infinite cyclic loading, the overall fatigue safety factor (SF) was significantly reduced but did not fall below 1, indicating that the abutment-implant complex maintained its structural integrity. For the Bicon short implant utilized in type II bone within the mandibular posterior region, the optimal dimensions were determined to be 6 mm by 5 mm.
conclusionsThe results obtained from dynamic and fatigue testing can serve as both confirmation and complement of the outcomes derived from static load analysis in subsequent investigations, while the static assessments are commonly employed to identify critical regions where implant-restoration system may be prone to failure. Therefore, the design and clinical evaluation of implant-restoration systems should focus on these high-risk regions. Under specific conditions, Bicon short implants have the potential to attain a satisfactory service life in clinical applications.
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.