ArticleBrazilian oral research2026
Stress distribution and bone deformation around narrow-diameter implants at different placement depths and in different bone densities.
Article in Brazilian oral research, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated the biomechanical behavior of narrow-diameter Morse taper implants (3.5 mm) placed in bone of different densities and at different depths, using finite element analysis. Sixteen three-dimensional virtual models, meshed with tetrahedral elements, were created. Each model comprised cortical bone, cancellous bone, a Morse taper implant, an abutment, and a single maxillary central incisor crown. An oblique force (30 degrees buccally) of 150 N was applied to evaluate peri-implant stress distribution across four bone densities (D1, D2, D3, and D4) and at four placement depths (0, 1, 2, and 3 mm). The interfaces were modeled as perfectly bonded, except at the implant-abutment interface (friction coefficient = 0.3). All materials were assumed to be linearly elastic and isotropic. After a nonlinear analysis, the maximum and minimum principal stresses, maximum principal strain, and Mohr-Coulomb ratio were recorded. The results revealed a stress distribution pattern with lower peak stress values at shallower placement depths and in D1 bone. All groups showed a similar trend: as the implant placement depth increased, the point of greatest stress concentration shifted apically. Implant placement in cortical bone provided a protective effect under oblique loads. In D3 and D4 bone types, crestal placement showed better biomechanical performance than subcrestal placement.
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.