Dentist № 1 (56) – 2025, pp. 18-23                                                                                                                        SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATION

Original and non-original components of dental implant systems and their differences under simulated chewing load conditions

V.V. Kirsanovaa, T.V. Furtsevb, R.S. Lukinc

aKrasnoyarsk State Medical University by named of Professor V.F. Voyno-Yasenetsky, Krasnoyarsk, Russia
bMD, PhD, DMSci, Professor, Krasnoyarsk State Medical University by named of Professor V.F. Voyno-Yasenetsky, Krasnoyarsk, Russia
cSiberian Federal University, Krasnoyarsk, Russia

https://doi.org/10.32993/dentist.2025.1(56).6

ABSTRACT
The aim of the study. To determine the differences in the behaviour of the original and non-original suprastructure and to evaluate the degree of their significance using the Straumann dental implant system as an example.
Objects and methods. Implant specimens with a conical fifteen-degree connection Straumann BL, an original Straumann abutment and a non-original abutment produced by ADM Dental compatible with this system participated in the experiment. Their geometric parameters were measured beforehand. The suprastructures were fixed to the fixed implants and tightened with a torque wrench at 35H-cm. The obtained values and known physical characteristics of the materials were entered into the ANSYS Workbench programme to create models and provide conditions of lateral masticatory loading. Statistical processing was performed using the Dynamic Time Warping software package.
Results and discussion. The results obtained allow us to state the following: the differences in the microgap between original and non-original abutments are non-linear, depending on the magnitude and cyclicity of the load; at lower loads (300 H), the non-original abutment has a smaller microgap, indicating better adaptation of the material or geometric features of the joint; the influence of the type of suprastructure on the stress in the landing platform has no regularity, and the choice in favour of the original/non-original abutment does not give statistically significant.
Conclusion.  The study demonstrates that non-original suprastructures can be competitive with original ones, but their behaviour under different loading conditions requires further research.

Keywords: dental implants, microgap, periimplantitis, non-original prosthetics, finite element method, chewing load

References

  1. D’yachenko D.Yu., D’yachenko S.V. Primenenie metoda konechnykh elementov v komp’yuternoy simulyatsii dlya uluchsheniya kachestva lecheniya patsientov v stomatologii: sistematicheskiy obzor [Finite element method in computer simulation for improved patient care in dentistry: a systematic review]. Kubanskij nauchny`j mediczinskij vestnik. – Kuban Scientifi Medical Bulletin. 2021, no. 5, pp. 98-116, doi: 10.25207/1608-6228-2021-28-5-98-116.
  2. Makhmudov T.G. Spektr mikroorganizmov v oblasti soedineniya «implantat-abatment» [The spectrum of microorganisms in the area of the implant – abutment connection]. Cathedra-Kafedra. Stomatologicheskoe obrazovanie. – Dental Education. 2019, no. 70, pp. 22-25.
  3. Semenyuk V.M., Putalova I.N., Artyukhov A.V., Syrtsova A.V., Guts A.K. Primenenie metoda konechnykh elementov v stomatologii (obzor literaturnykh istochnikov) [Application of the finite element method in dentistry (literature review)]. Matematicheskie struktury` i modelirovanie. – Mathematical Structures and Modeling. 2002, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 98-116.
  4. Gorobets S.M., Romanenko I.G., Dzhereley A.A., Bobkova C.A., Kryuchkov D.Y., Gorobets O.V. Faktory riska razvitiya vospalitel’nykh oslozhneniy dental’noy implantatsii [Risk factors inflammatory complication of dental implantation]. Tavricheskij mediko-biologicheskij vestnik. – Tavricheskiy Mediko-Biologicheskiy Vestnik. 2017, vol. 20, no. 2(1), pp. 208-214.
  5. Sharanda V.A., Golovko A.I. Opredelenie vybora tipa soedineniya v suprastrukture dental’nogo implantata v ortopedicheskikh konstruktsiyakh: sovremennye kontseptsii [Determination of the type of connection in the suprastructure of a dental implant in prosthetics: modern concepts]. Sovremennaya stomatologiya. – Modern Dentistry. 2021, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 19-23.
  6. Shevela T.L. Nauchnoe obosnovanie differentsirovannogo lecheniya patsientov s periimplantitom na osnovanii kliniko-laboratornykh pokazateley [Scientific justification of differentiated treatment of patients with periimplantitis based on clinical and laboratory indicators]. Minsk, 2021, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 34-38. (in Russian). DOI: 10.32993/dentist.2021.1(40).5
  7. Shevela T.L., Pohodenko-Chudakova I.O. Prognoz implantologicheskogo lecheniya s uchetom struktury myagkikh tkaney, okruzhayushchikh dental’nyy implantat [Prognosis of implantological treatment taking into account the structure of soft tissues surrounding the dental implant]. Stomatolog. Minsk. – Minsk. 2022, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 27-30, doi: 10.32993/dentist.2022.2(45).6
  8. Shevela T.L., Pohodenko-Chudakova I.O. Novyy sposob otsenki rezul’tatov lecheniya periimplantita u stomatologicheskikh patsientov [New method for assessing the results of treatment of peri-implantitis in patients at the stage of follow-up]. Stomatolog. Minsk. – Minsk. 2024, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 20-24, doi: 10.32993/dentist.2024.1(52).6
  9. Mitra D., Gurav P., Rodrigues S., Khobragade B., Mahajan A. Evaluation of stress distribution in and around dental implants using three different implant-abutment interfaces with platform-switched and non-platform-switched abutments: A three-dimensional finite element analysis. Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects. 2023, Vol. 17, N 4, pp. 256‒264, doi: 34172/joddd.2023.40723.
  10. Kist S., Stawarczyk B., Kollmuss M., Hickel R., Huth K.C. Fracture load and chewing simulation of zirconia and stainless-steel crowns for primary molars. European Journal of Oral Sciences. 2019, Vol. 127, N 4, pp. 369‒375, doi: 1111/eos.12645.
  11. Gil F.J., Herrero-Climent M., Lázaro P., Rios J.V. Implant–abutment connections: influence of the design on the microgap and their fatigue and fracture behavior of dental implants. Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine. 2014, Vol. 25, pp. 1825–1830, doi: 1007/s10856-014-5211-7.
  12. Candotto V., Gabrione F., Oberti L., Lento D., Severino M. The role of implant-abutment connection in preventing bacterial leakage: a review. Journal of Biological Regulators and Homeostatic Agents. 2019, Vol. 33, N 3(1), pp. 129‒134.
  13. Cho S.Y., Huh Y.H., Park C.J., Cho L.R. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of the stress distribution at the internal implant-abutment connection. The International Journal of Periodontics and Restorative Dentistry. 2016, Vol. 36, N 3, pp. 49‒58, doi: 11607/prd.2351.

Correspondence to:  Е-mail: vikt.kirs@yandex.ru