ArticleBMC oral health2026
Stress distribution of an anteriorly placed single implant in different clinical scenarios: a 3D finite element analysis.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStress distribution around anterior dental implants may vary depending on implant placement timing and loading protocol. This study aimed to evaluate stress distributions around anteriorly placed single implants under different clinical scenarios using three-dimensional finite element analysis (FEA).
methodsThree clinical scenarios were simulated: (i) healed bone with delayed loading, (ii) healed bone with immediate loading, and (iii) immediate implant placement into a fresh extraction socket with immediate loading. Two abutment angulations (5° and 10°) were evaluated. Horizontal (25.5 N) and oblique (178 N at 30° to the implant long axis) forces were applied to the palatal surface of the restoration. Stress distributions in cortical and trabecular bone were assessed using maximum (P1) and minimum (P3) principal stresses, while von Mises stresses were calculated for the implant and abutment.
resultsIn cortical bone, the highest tensile stress values occurred under oblique loading in the healed bone-immediate loading scenario (P1: 38.67-38.94 MPa), whereas minimal cortical stresses were observed in the immediate implant placement scenario (P1 ≤ 4.32 MPa). In trabecular bone, the highest stresses were recorded in the immediate implant placement with immediate loading, reaching P1 values of 11.20 MPa (5°) and 12.88 MPa (10°) under oblique loading, followed by healed bone with immediate loading (P1 up to 6.72 MPa). Oblique loading consistently generated higher stress values than horizontal loading. Increasing abutment angulation resulted in slightly higher stress magnitudes without altering stress distribution patterns.
conclusionsStress distribution around anterior single implants is primarily influenced by the clinical placement and loading protocol. Immediate implant placement combined with immediate loading resulted in the highest stress concentrations, particularly in trabecular bone, whereas healed bone with delayed loading demonstrated the most favorable stress distribution. Abutment angulation had a secondary effect on stress magnitude.
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.