ArticleBMC oral health2026
Three-dimensional finite element analysis of tooth and implant-supported telescopic prosthesis using zirconia, PEKK, and cobalt chromium crowns.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the biomechanical behavior and stress distribution of tooth–implant-supported telescopic prostheses using different combinations of zirconia, polyetherketoneketone (PEKK), and cobalt–chromium (Co-Cr) materials for primary and secondary crowns by means of three-dimensional finite element analysis (3D FEA). MATERIALS AND
methodsA three-dimensional finite element model representing a mandibular arch restored with a telescopic overdenture supported by two canines and two implants in the molar region was constructed. Nine prosthetic configurations were analyzed based on different primary and secondary crown material combinations (zirconia, PEKK, and Co-Cr). All materials were assumed to be homogeneous, isotropic, and linearly elastic. Static axial occlusal loads simulating centric occlusion were applied. Von Mises stress distribution was evaluated in prosthetic components, implants, natural teeth, and surrounding bone.
resultsMaterial selection significantly influenced stress distribution within the telescopic system and supporting structures. PEKK used as a secondary crown reduced stress concentrations within the prosthetic crowns but resulted in increased stress transfer to the supporting bone, teeth, and implants compared with zirconia and Co-Cr. When PEKK was used as a primary crown, stress levels within prosthetic components were reduced, while stress transmission to supporting structures was not substantially altered. Zirconia and Co-Cr demonstrated comparable biomechanical behavior across all configurations. In all models, secondary crowns exhibited higher stress values than primary crowns, and implants were subjected to greater loads than natural teeth.
conclusionsWithin the limitations of this 3D finite element study, material combinations in tooth–implant-supported telescopic prostheses significantly affect biomechanical stress distribution. PEKK exhibits a material-dependent stress-modulating behavior that should be carefully considered during prosthetic design to balance prosthetic protection and load transfer to supporting structures.
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.