ArticleJournal of dental sciences2026
The influence of the connector position placing, cement thickness and load direction on biomechanical performance of implant supported mesial cantilever: Finite element analysis.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 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
Background/purpose: Implant-supported cantilevers crowns (ISCCs) can be a viable alternative to avoid surgical adjunctive procedures when replacing missing teeth. The connector position placing (CPP) is crucial and can be adjusted to optimize the biomechanics which important to decision for long term success of treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the biomechanical performance of ISCCs with different CPPs design, cement thickness and load directions. Materials and methods: Three-dimensional finite element clinical simulating models of ISCCs in posterior mandible were fabricated. Twelve clinical simulating models consisted of three CPPs, two cement thickness (30 and 60 microns) and two load directions (axial and oblique) were investigated. The finite element analysis was performed, and the stress of implant, prosthesis and periodontal ligament, strain of the bone, and displacement of teeth were recorded and analyzed. Results: All clinical simulating models, oblique loads can cause more significant biomechanical performance compared to axial loads. The CPPs design significantly influences the biomechanical performance of ISCCs. It found that the mesial CPP (MCPP) experienced lower levels of bone strains compared to regular CPP (RCPP) and distal CPP (DCPP). The cement thickness is generally considered to have a minor impact compared to other factors. Conclusion: In biomechanical point of view, the CPPs design influences the biomechanical performance of ISCCs. The MCPP is considered biomechanically more advantageous especially in terms of reducing strain on the surrounding bone. Clinicians should carefully consider this factor to ensure optimal biomechanical performance and minimize the risk of biomechanical complications.
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.