Materiale Plastice
Cite as: Mater. Plast.

OSIM Nr. R102356
ISSN Print 0025-5289
ISSN Online 2668-8220
Materiale Plastice - Latest Issue

Latest Issue >>>
   Volume 60, 2023
   Volume 59, 2022
   Volume 58, 2021
   Volume 57, 2020
   Volume 56, 2019
   Volume 55, 2018
   Volume 54, 2017
   Volume 53, 2016
   Volume 52, 2015
   Volume 51, 2014
   Volume 50, 2013
   Volume 49, 2012
   Volume 48, 2011
   Volume 47, 2010
   Volume 46, 2009
   Volume 45, 2008
   Volume 44, 2007
   Volume 43, 2006
   Volume 42, 2005
   Volume 41, 2004
   Volume 40, 2003
<<<< back

Materiale Plastice (Mater. Plast.), Year 2015, Volume 52, Issue 4,

OANA CELLA ANDREI, CONSTANTIN DAGUCI, MONICA SCRIECIU, MIRCEA HORIA TIEREAN, MIHAI BURLIBASA,LIVIA ALICE TANASESCU Advantages of Using Acrylic and Metal-composite Crowns in Mandibular Single Implant Restorations - FEA Study

To determine if acrylic or composite resins are favorable choices for the single crown on implants. It was performed a FE Analysis using the IBM Autodesk Inventor 2014 for a single 3.75x8mm mandibular implant, a straight titanium abutment, three crowns (acrylic, metal-composite and metal-ceramic) and a type III bone with a 1mm cortical component. For the implant, the maximum stress was 178.7MPa (acrylic crown), 96.38MPa (metal-composite crown) and 86.17MPa (metal-ceramic crown). For the abutment, the maximum stress was 312.4MPa (acrylic crown), 140.8MPa (metal-composite crown), and 121.5MPa (metal-ceramic crown). For the retainer screw, the maximum stress was 75.67MPa (acrylic crown), 33.66MPa (metalcomposite crown), and 34.64MPa (metal-ceramic crown). For the metallic component of the crown, the maximum stress was 248.7MPa (metal-composite crown), and 207.1MPa (metal-ceramic crown). For the aesthetic component of the crown, the maximum stress was 28.93MPa (acrylic crown), 22.45MPa (metalcomposite crown), and 28.13MPa (metal-ceramic crown). For the cortical bone, the maximum stress was 62.74MPa (acrylic crown), 37.63MPa (metal-composite crown), and 40.3MPa (metal-ceramic crown). For the trabecular bone, the maximum stress was 7.147MPa (acrylic crown), 4.995MPa (metal-composite crown), and 4.973MPa (metal-ceramic crown). For the metal-composite crown, the stress distribution in the trabecular bone is more uniform, comparing to the acrylic crown, which is an advantage. For the metalceramic crown the stress distribution in both bone components is similar as for metal-composite crown. The safety factor shows that there is no risk of plastic deformation, nor for acrylic or for the composite resins. The composite resin on Cr-Ni alloys is still the best material for the single implant crown. The acrylic resin and ceramics on Cr-Ni alloys proved a similar resistance to stresses. Keywords: acrylic crown, metal-composite crown, single implant, FEA

Issue: 2015 Volume 52, Issue 4
Publication date: 2015/12/30
download pdf   Download Pdf Article
Creative Commons License
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Downloads number: 0
<<<< back
  Search Authors
Crossref Member Badge
 DOI  logo
 Gold Open Access | Source=http://www.plos.org/  | Author=art designer at PLoS
Creative Commons License