ArticleBMC oral health2026
Biomechanical evaluation of cantilever length and arch form in the All-on-4 implant concept: a 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis finite element analysis (FEA) was performed to evaluate the stress distribution and biomechanical performance of implants, cortical and trabecular bone tissues, and the titanium prosthetic framework in the All-on-4 implant concept. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of different cantilever lengths and arch forms on the biomechanical behavior of these components.
methodsDigital models representing an edentulous mandible were created in three different arch forms: square, oval, and triangular. In each model, two anterior parallel implants and two posterior tilted implants were placed within the All-on-4 concept. Full arch fixed prostheses with a titanium framework were designed on the implants. For each arch form, cantilever lengths were applied as follows: 5, 10, and 15 mm. To physiologically simulate masticatory forces, the foodstuff loading method was employed. Occlusal loads consisting of a vertical component of 150 N and an oblique component of 100 N were applied to the posterior region. Maximum von Mises stress values were calculated for the implants and titanium framework, whereas maximum and minimum principal stresses were analyzed in the cortical and trabecular bone tissues.
resultsIn all arch forms, stress values obtained in the implant and titanium framework components under vertical loading were lower compared with those under oblique loading. In contrast, in the cortical and trabecular bone tissues, stress values observed under oblique loading conditions were lower than those under vertical loading. With an increase in cantilever length from 5 mm to 15 mm, stress values in the implant, framework, and bone tissues generally increased across all arch forms. Regardless of loading type, stress values were consistently lowest in the square arch form, followed by the oval and triangular arch forms. However, in the square arch form, higher maximum principal stress values were observed in the cortical bone in the 5 mm cantilever configuration compared with the 10 mm and 15 mm cantilever lengths.
conclusionsThe biomechanical performance of the All-on-4 implant concept is influenced by arch form, cantilever length, and loading direction. Clinically, considering patient specific arch form and limiting cantilever length may reduce stress concentrations and support long term success.
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.