ArticleCureus2025
Finite Element Analysis of Platform Switching Effects on Stress Distribution in Posterior Implants Placed in Different Bone Types Under Axial and Oblique Loading Conditions.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Finite element analysis of stress distribution after folded and single-layer fibular reconstruction with implant restoration for brown class Ⅱ mandibular defects.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Evaluating stress distribution and clinical success in varied dental implant designs.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Biomechanical Effects of Platform Diameter and Screw Length in an Abutment-Free Tissue-Level Implant System Compared with a Ti-Base Configuration: 3D Finite Element Analysis.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- The impact of physiological and parafunctional posterior occlusal forces on experimental Ti-15Zrsupracrestal dental implant - a finite element analysis.Medicine and pharmacy reports · 2025Article
- Stress distribution on platform switched dental implant technique with different bone type.Bioinformation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe present study was conducted to compare stress distribution in platform-switched and non-platform-switched implants placed in D2 (mandible) and D3 (maxilla) bones under axial and oblique loading, using finite element analysis (FEA). MATERIALS AND
methodsCone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-derived three-dimensional models of the posterior maxilla (D3) and mandible (D2) were developed. Implants (11.5 × 4.2 mm) were modeled with two abutment configurations: 4.2 mm (non-platform switching) and 3.2 mm (platform switching). Porcelain-fused-to-metal crowns were placed on all models. A vertical (axial) load of 200 N and an oblique load of 200 N at 30° were applied to the left first molar. ANSYS Workbench (ANSYS, Inc., Canonsburg, Pennsylvania) was used to assess the von Mises stress distribution in the cortical bone, cancellous bone, implant, abutment, and abutment screws.
resultsPlatform switching resulted in lower stress values in both D2 and D3 bones under axial and oblique loads, especially at the crestal bone level. The D3 (maxillary) models exhibited higher stress concentrations overall than the D2 (mandibular) models, indicating a greater biomechanical challenge in less dense bone. Platform switching effectively reduced the peak stresses and led to a more uniform stress distribution. However, the implant and abutment components in the platform-switched models experienced higher internal stress.
conclusionPlatform switching improved stress distribution and reduced crestal bone stress in both D2 and D3 bones, especially under oblique loading.
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.