ArticleBMC oral health2026
Finite element analysis of stress distribution after folded and single-layer fibular reconstruction with implant restoration for brown class Ⅱ mandibular defects.
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
objectiveThis study aimed to compare the stress distribution after folded and single-layer fibular reconstruction with implant-supported restoration for Brown Class Ⅱ mandibular defects using finite element analysis (FEA), to provide a theoretical basis for selecting an optimal mandibular reconstruction strategy in clinical practice.
methodsA healthy adult female volunteer from Bengbu Medical University underwent spiral computed tomography (CT) scans of the mandible and fibula. The CT data were imported into Mimics 21.0 software to reconstruct three-dimensional models of the intact mandible, dentition, and fibula. These models were further processed in Geomagic Studio 2014, Materialise 3-matic 18.0, and Exocad to establish FEA models of the intact mandible, as well as single-layer (Model A) and folded (Model B) fibular reconstruction with implant-supported restoration for Brown Class Ⅱ mandibular defects. The geometric models were then imported into Ansys 19.0 software for FEA to evaluate biomechanical characteristics and stress distribution patterns on implants, the reconstructed fibula, and surrounding bone tissues were compared between the two reconstruction methods.
results(1) Under identical loading conditions, stress concentration areas in the intact mandible were observed at the bilateral condylar necks, sigmoid notches, mandibular angles, and junctions between the mandibular body and ramus, with the maximum stress (57.627 MPa) located at the affected-side mandibular angle. (2) In Model A and Model B, the maximum stresses in the residual mandible were 82.619 MPa and 80.842 MPa, respectively, both at the affected-side mandibular angle, representing increases of 43.4% and 40.3% compared to the intact mandible (57.627 MPa). (3) The maximum stress in the reconstructed fibula was 65.31 MPa in Model B, which was lower than the 73.922 MPa in Model A. (4) The maximum stresses in implants 1, 2, and 3 were 19.496 MPa, 50.638 MPa, and 78.747 MPa in Model B, and 32.537 MPa, 99.558 MPa, and 123.14 MPa in Model A, all located at the implant necks.
conclusionCompared with the single-layer fibular flap, the folded fibular flap is a superior choice for the reconstruction of Brown Class Ⅱ mandibular defects with subsequent implant restoration.
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.