ArticleBMC oral health2026
The effect of varying the position of implant screw access opening on the stress distribution of sealing composite resin: a 3D-FEA study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to assess the mechanical differences of composite resin sealing the screw access channel with different-positioned openings by a three-dimensional finite element analysis.
methodsA 3D finite element model of dental implant at the site of mandibular first molar was established using computer-aided design (CAD). Models of sealing composite resin with different thicknesses were applied under 200 N static loading, and the optimal thickness was then selected via stress distribution analysis of composite resin models. Angulated screw channel (ASC) was used to vary the position of implant screw access opening. 200 N static loading was then applied to composite resin models with the selected thickness at different stages of a chewing cycle, and the stress of sealing composite resin in screw access channel with different-positioned openings was compared.
resultsThe stress within composite resin model was stably at a lower level when the thickness was no less than 3 mm. Varying the position of implant screw access opening influenced stress distribution of sealing composite resin. In contrast with the opening located at central fossa, both maximum von Mises stress and shear stress of sealing composite resin (4.503 MPa and 1.032 MPa) was reduced when the opening was on the lingual side of central fossa (3.974 MPa and 0.9464 MPa) but was increased when the opening was on the buccal side of central fossa (5.695 MPa and 2.162 MPa).
conclusionsThe stress was significantly lower at the site of mandibular molar when the position of screw access opening was designed on the lingual side of central fossa. Within the limits of the present in silico investigation, this study provided a new design strategy for screw-retained implant prosthesis to reduce the mechanical complications caused by the incomplete sealing of screw access opening.
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.