ArticleBMC oral health2025
Effect of different titanium mesh thicknesses on mechanical strength and bone stress: a finite element study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Design Features of a Titanium Mesh for Guided Bone Regeneration and In Vivo Testing in Vitamin D3 Deficiency Condition.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to investigate the influence of different titanium mesh thicknesses (0.1 mm, 0.2 mm, and 0.3 mm) on mechanical durability and stress distribution in guided bone regeneration using finite element analysis (FEA).
methodsThree-dimensional mandibular bone models were reconstructed from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) data of a patient with a posterior alveolar defect. Custom titanium meshes with varying thicknesses were designed and virtually applied to the defect area. All models were subjected to a vertical force of 30 N to simulate masticatory loading. FEA simulations were performed using ALTAIR Hypermesh and OptiStruct software to evaluate von Mises stress distribution across the mesh, graft, and bone.
resultsThe 0.1 mm mesh exhibited the highest stress concentrations (981.569 MPa), indicating a high risk of plastic deformation and potential graft damage (35.287 MPa). The 0.2 mm mesh provided moderate protection with improved stress distribution (mesh: 452.218 MPa, graft: 11.589 MPa). The 0.3 mm mesh showed the best mechanical performance, with the lowest stress values on both the mesh (226.205 MPa) and the graft (7.785 MPa). Bone stress remained below critical thresholds in all models.
conclusionMesh thickness significantly affects the mechanical behavior and stress shielding capacity of titanium meshes in GBR applications. A thickness of 0.3 mm offers the most reliable mechanical performance. However, 0.2 mm meshes may serve as a viable alternative in cases requiring greater flexibility or lower cost, with caution toward borderline graft stress.
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.