Effect of different restorative crown and customized abutment materials on stress distribution in single implants and peripheral bone: A three-dimensional finite element analysis study

Abstract

Statement of problem. In recent years, the use of resin-matrix ceramics and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) abutments has been suggested to absorb excessive stresses on dental implants. However, only a few studies have evaluated the effect of these materials on stress distribution in implants and peripheral bone structure. Purpose. The purpose of this finite element analysis was to evaluate the biomechanical behaviors of resin-matrix ceramics and PEEK customized abutments in terms of stress distribution in implants and peripheral bone. Material and methods. Three-dimensional (3D) models of a bone-level implant system and a titanium base abutment were created by using the standard tessellation language (STL) data of original implant components. An anatomic customized abutment and a maxillary right second premolar crown were then modeled over the titanium base abutment. A bone block representing the maxillary right premolar area was created, and the implant was placed in the bone block with 100% osseointegration. Six different models were created according to combinations of restoration materials (translucent zirconia [TZI], lithium disilicate glass ceramic [IPS], polymer-infiltrated hybrid ceramic [VTE]), and customized abutment materials (PEEK and zirconia). In each model, the implants were loaded vertically (200 N) and obliquely (100 N). The stress distribution in' the crown, implant, and abutments was evaluated through the von Mises stress analysis, and the stress distribution in the peripheral bone was examined through the maximum and minimum principal stress analyses. Results. The oblique load resulted in high stress values in the implant components, restorative crown, and cortical bone. Low stress values were observed in the VTE crowns. Zirconia customized abutments exhibited higher stress values than PEEK customized abutments. The stress distributions in the implant and peripheral bone were similar in all models. Conclusions. Changes in restoration and customized abutment material did not affect stress distribution in the implant and peripheral bone.