Academic Edi o : Bongju Kim
Recei ed: 2 May 2025
Re ised: 31 May 2025
Accep ed: 3 June 2025
Published: 7 June 2025
Ci a ion: González-Mede os, P.;
Rod íguez-Gue a, J.; González, J.E.;
Pica do, A.; To es, Y. A Fini e Elemen
Analysis o a New Den al Implan
Design: The In luence o he Diame e ,
Leng h, and Ma e ial o an Implan on
I s Biomechanical Beha io . Ma e ials
2025,18, 2692. h ps://doi.o g/
10.3390/ma18122692
Copy igh : © 2025 by he au ho s.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Swi ze land.
This a icle is an open access a icle
dis ibu ed unde he e ms and
condi ions o he C ea i e Commons
A ibu ion (CC BY) license
(h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/
licenses/by/4.0/).
A icle
A Fini e Elemen Analysis o a New Den al Implan Design: The
In luence o he Diame e , Leng h, and Ma e ial o an Implan on
I s Biomechanical Beha io
Ped o González-Mede os 1, Jenni e Rod íguez-Gue a 1, Jesús E. González 1,2,*, Albe o Pica do 3
and Yadi To es 4,*
1
Depa amen o de Bioma e iales Ce ámicos y Me álicos, Cen o de Bioma e iales, Uni e sidad de La Habana,
A e. Uni e sidad s/n En e G y Ronda, Vedado, La Habana 10400, Cuba;
[email p o ec ed] (P.G.-M.); jenni e [email p o ec ed] (J.R.-G.)
2G upo de Biomecánica, Facul ad de Mecánica, Uni e sidad Tecnológica de la Habana “José An onio
Eche e ía”, Di ección Calle 114, # 11901, e/Ciclo ía y Ro onda, Ma ianao, Cujae, La Habana 19390, Cuba
3
Depa amen o de Ingenie ía del Diseño, Escuela Poli écnica Supe io de Se illa, Uni e sidad de Se illa, Calle
Vi gen de Á ica, 7, 41011 Se illa, Spain; apica [email p o ec ed]
4Ingenie ía y Ciencia de los Ma e iales y del T anspo e, Escuela Poli écnica Supe io de Se illa, Uni e sidad
de Se illa, Calle Vi gen de Á ica, 7, 41011 Se illa, Spain
*Co espondence: [email p o ec ed] (J.E.G.); [email p o ec ed] (Y.T.)
Abs ac : I is widely ecognized ha excessi e s ess and/o s ain can lead o pe i-implan
bone a ophy; he e o e, he clinical success o den al implan s is in insically ela ed o hei
biomechanical beha io . This s udy e alua es he in luence o he diame e , leng h, and
ma e ial [Ti6Al4V (
α
+
β
Ti) and Ti35Nb7Z 5Ta (
β
-Ti)] o a no el cylind ical den al implan
on s ess and s ain le els wi hin maxilla y bone o ype II quali y. The implan design
aims o ensu e an app op ia e dis ibu ion o s esses and s ains wi hin he pe i-implan
bone s uc u es (co ical and abecula bones) while also acili a ing su gical machining by
equi ing a simple, linea , and less expensi e bone incision. This app oach minimizes he
isk o he mal nec osis, a common complica ion in os eo omies o conical implan s ha
can lead o pe i-implan bone loss. Using ini e elemen analysis, s ess and s ain pa e ns
we e e alua ed in he maxilla y second p emola egion unde s a ic delayed loading. The
esul s e eal ha he co ical bone s ains emained below he c i ical h eshold (0.003)
o p e en eso p ion. In he abecula bone, only la ge diame e /leng h con igu a ions
sa is ied he p e ious s ain c i e ion. In all simula ions, abecula bone s ess emained
below 3 MPa, whe eas co ical bone s ess peaked a 78 MPa. No ably, he implan model
wi h he la ges diame e /leng h minimized s ess and s ain concen a ions in ype II bone
when compa ed o smalle designs, he eby demons a ing i s biomechanical ad an age.
Keywo ds: den al implan ; ini e elemen analysis; biomechanical beha io ; s ess shielding
Phenomenon; β-Ti alloy; implan dimensions
1. In oduc ion
In ecen decades, subs an ial p og ess has been achie ed in p os he ic den is y,
leading o no able imp o emen s in bo h den al implan echnology and su gical echniques.
The p ima y ocus o hese ad ances has been o ensu e p edic able clinical ou comes while
simul aneously enhancing unc ional pe o mance and es he ic esul s in pa ien s wi h
comple e o pa ial eden ulism [
1
]. The e icacy o p os he ic ehabili a ion depends on
mul iple a iables ha can in luence he biomechanical in e ac ion be ween he implan
Ma e ials 2025,18, 2692 h ps://doi.o g/10.3390/ma18122692
Ma e ials 2025,18, 2692 2 o 20
and he osseous issue [
2
,
3
]. These ac o s encompass he exac posi ioning o he implan ,
he inhe en mechanical and s uc u al p ope ies o he bone issue, he mechanical and
geome ic ea u es o he implan i sel , and he in ensi y and ype o load ansmi ed
om he implan o he su ounding bone [
4
–
6
]. Addi ionally, i is necessa y o conside
pa ien -speci ic ac o s such as smoking habi s and bac e ial en i onmen [7–9].
The success o den al implan ea men depends, among o he ac o s, on he e icien
ans e o occlusal loads a he bone–implan in e ace [
10
]. Mul iple elemen s, including
he loading egimen, implan su ace opog aphy, a ailable bone olume, as well as he ma-
e ial p ope ies and design cha ac e is ics o he implan , in luence his load ans e [
11
].
An op imal design can mi iga e s ess and s ain concen a ions while imp o ing hei
dis ibu ion pa e ns, hus imp o ing he p obabili y o long- e m implan su i al [
12
].
S ess and s ain dis ibu ions in he pe i-implan bone a e di ec ly a ec ed by he na u e
o he applied load [
13
]. Excessi e mechanical loading (o e load condi ions) may ini ia e
bone mic o- ac u es, po en ially leading o implan loosening o ca as ophic ailu e. Fu -
he mo e, o e load si ua ions can cause accele a ed bone eso p ion in he pe i-implan
egion and educe abecula bone densi y [
14
]. Rega ding implan ma e ials, hey mus
demons a e essen ial cha ac e is ics including biocompa ibili y, s uc u al du abili y, and
supe io esis ance o co osion, wea , and mechanical ac u e [15].
The selec ion o an app op ia e den al implan necessi a es a comp ehensi e e alua ion
o he esidual al eola bone, inco po a ing an assessmen o he e ical bone heigh
and mesiodis al dimensions o he eden ulous space, o achie e op imal biomechanical
pe o mance and es he ic esul s [
16
,
17
]. Clinical guidelines ecommend main aining a
minimum dis ance o 1.25 mm be ween an implan and adjacen na u al ee h, p o iding
adequa e space o suppo bone and pe iodon al ligamen issue while ensu ing su icien
ascula supply o success ul osseoin eg a ion. Addi ionally, a minimum ci cum e en ial
bone hickness o 0.5 mm su ounding he implan mus be p ese ed o ensu e he long-
e m clinical s abili y and success o p os he ic ehabili a ion [18,19]. Pos -ex ac ion bone
eso p ion in he maxilla leads o educed esidual bone heigh , pa icula ly in he pos e io
egion, whe e p oximi y o he maxilla y sinus complica es he placemen o s anda d-
leng h implan s [
20
]. Al hough bone g a ing and sinus li p ocedu es a e well-es ablished
ea men op ions, hey a e associa ed wi h inc eased mo bidi y and a p olonged du a ion
o ea men . Sho implan s p o ide a minimally in asi e solu ion wi hou comp omising
p ima y s abili y as la ge diame e s and op imized implan body geome y can compensa e
o educed leng h, he eby enhancing ini ial e en ion in low-densi y maxilla y bone [
21
].
I is impo an o no e ha bone issue esponds o al e a ions in he loading condi ions
o which i is subjec ed. This phenomenon, known as bone emodeling, in ol es he
abili y o he bone o adap and modi y i sel o achie e a balance be ween s eng h and
esis ance [
22
–
24
]. Howe e , o e load condi ions can lead o bone ac u e, a igue ailu e,
and de imen al consequences, including ma ginal bone loss o e en osseoin eg a ion
ailu e [
25
,
26
]. Pe i-implan bone eso p ion can be igge ed by a ious ac o s, such as
su gical auma, bac e ial in ec ions, and s a es o o e load o unde load, bu o a lesse
ex en [
6
,
27
,
28
]. O e load in he pe i-implan bone can occu due o de iciencies in he
load ans e mechanisms, such as malocclusion, inco ec use o he implan , inco ec
design o he p os he ic c own and/o implan , and imp ope placemen o he implan .
Consequen ly, his can esul in high s ess concen a ions and/o s ains a he bone–
implan in e ace and, ul ima ely, bone eso p ion [29,30].
In essence, biomechanical load ans e a he bone–implan in e ace cons i u es a
c i ical de e minan o den al implan success. Op imal implan design, including i s
geome y, diame e , leng h, and h ee-dimensional posi ioning wi hin he maxilla, plays a
pi o al ole in go e ning he occlusal load dis ibu ion and he subsequen bone adap i e
Ma e ials 2025,18, 2692 3 o 20
esponse [
31
–
33
]. A design ha p omo es a balanced load dis ibu ion and minimizes s ess
concen a ions can help p e en bone eso p ion and imp o e he du abili y and clinical
e ec i eness o implan ehabili a ions [34–36].
The use o ini e elemen analysis (FEA) in p os he ic den is y has become a p edom-
inan quan i a i e me hod o in es iga e he biomechanical beha io o den al implan s
in a ious clinical scena ios [
37
,
38
]. This echnique enables he p edic ion o s ess and
s ain dis ibu ions in pe i-implan egions while conside ing mul iple a iables, including
implan and p os hesis design, load magni ude and di ec ion, bone mechanical p ope ies,
and o he case-speci ic condi ions [
39
]. The p incipal ad an age o he FEA me hod lies in
i s abili y o simula e he complexi y o eal clinical si ua ions. Enabling he modeling o
complex geome ies and ma e ials and he in e ac ions be ween a ious componen s o he
biomechanical sys em acili a es a mo e accu a e unde s anding o he mechanical beha io
wi hin bone [
40
,
41
]. Consequen ly, his app oach allows o he iden i ica ion o po en ial
o e loaded egions o unde loaded zones ha may igge bone eso p ion o implan
ailu e [
42
–
44
]. Howe e , i mus be ecognized ha FEA s udies a e no exemp om
ce ain assump ions and limi a ions. These encompass he selec ion o ma e ial p ope -
ies, bounda y condi ion de ini ions, in e ace cha ac e iza ions be ween componen s, and
he gene al modeling me hodology [
35
,
45
]. The alidi y o FEA-de i ed esul s depends
on he igo o hese assump ions and conside a ions and on he p ecise expe imen al
alida ion o he models. Fu he mo e, hese esul s a e used o op imize he design o
den al implan s by inco po a ing modi ica ions in geome y and dimensions [
46
,
47
]. In
summa y, using FEA o examining den al implan biomechanics o e s signi ican bene i s
by enabling comp ehensi e simula ion and analysis o complex bone–implan sys em
in e ac ions [
48
]. Ne e heless, he esul s mus be in e p e ed cau iously as hey emain
subjec o he inhe en assump ions and limi a ions o he modeling app oach, as p e iously
ou lined [49].
Ti6Al4V (
α
+
β
Ti) alloys a e widely used in implan applica ions. Howe e , hei high
elas ic modulus (~110 GPa) and limi ed bioac i i y can lead o s ess concen a ions a he
bone–implan in e ace and con ibu e o pe i-implan bone eso p ion. In con as ,
β
-phase
i anium alloys such as Ti35Nb7Z 5Ta (
β
-Ti) p esen signi ican ad an ages, including a
lowe elas ic modulus (~55 GPa), mo e simila o co ical bone (~10–30 GPa), along wi h
imp o ed co osion esis ance and biocompa ibili y [
50
]. Recen compu a ional and
in i o
s udies ha e shown ha
β
-Ti alloys p omo e mo e a o able s ain dis ibu ions, educing
s ess shielding and imp o ing load ans e a he bone–implan in e ace. Howe e ,
comp ehensi e e alua ions o hei mic omechanical beha io emain limi ed [51].
Al hough widely used, conical implan s exhibi c i ical biomechanical and su gical
limi a ions: (1) hei design induces s ess concen a ion a he apex, inc easing he isk
o mic o ac u es in high-densi y bone ( ypes I and II); (2) complex bone p epa a ion ( a-
pe ed su gical d illing) may cause o e hea ing and nec osis, leading o co ical bone loss,
and (3) educed ini ial bone- o-implan con ac a he apical po ion comp omises ea ly
osseoin eg a ion [
52
]. Cylind ical implan s o e key ad an ages as a po en ial solu ion:
(a) uni o m
load dis ibu ion by elimina ing localized s ess poin s; (b) simpli ied (s aigh )
and less in asi e os eo omy, p ese ing bone in eg i y and minimizing he mal isks;
and (c) g ea e ini ial bone con ac a ea, enhancing osseoin eg a ion in high-densi y bone
( ype II) [
53
]. The s anda dized d illing p o ocol o cylind ical implan s educes su gical
ime, ins umen cos s, and he mal complica ions compa ed o conical sys ems, o e ing
signi ican economic ad an ages in high-densi y bone [
54
]. This pe spec i e challenges
he app oach pa adigm, sugges ing ha cylind ical designs op imize bo h biomechanical
pe o mance and cos -e iciency in speci ic bone pheno ypes, wi h di ec implica ions o
clinical planning and long- e m implan longe i y. A no el single-componen cylind ical
Ma e ials 2025,18, 2692 4 o 20
den al implan was designed, o e ing signi ican ad an ages: i elimina es he mic ogap
and connec ion in e aces p esen in wo-piece sys ems, which a e p one o bac e ial colo-
niza ion, sc ew loosening, and gal anic co osion. In addi ion, i imp o es biomechanical
s abili y by dis ibu ing occlusal o ces uni o mly h ough a single-uni s uc u e, educing
s ess concen a ion a p os he ic junc ions, and i simpli ies clinical wo k lows by a oiding
abu men sea ing inaccu acies, he eby imp o ing p ima y s abili y, a key equi emen o
ea ly unc ional loading.
The objec i e o his s udy is o assess he impac o he diame e , leng h, and ma e ial
(Ti6Al4V (
α
+
β
Ti) and Ti35Nb7Z 5Ta (
β
-Ti)) on he biomechanical beha io o a new
cylind ical den al implan model. Speci ically, i s in luence was e alua ed on he maximum
le els o on Mises equi alen s esses and on Mises s ains in he pe i-implan bone
(co ical and abecula bone) o he second p emola egion o he maxilla y.
2. Ma e ials and Me hods
2.1. Den al Implan Models
The geome y o a single-componen den al implan model used in p e ious s ud-
ies was modi ied o educe p oduc ion cos s and simpli y i s ancho ing p ocess in he
maxilla [
55
,
56
]. Speci ically, he ape o he e e enced design was signi ican ly educed.
Based on hese modi ica ions, six a ian s o he new single-componen den al implan
model (Figu e 1) we e ob ained in he Au odesk In en o 2020 so wa e (Au odesk Inc.,
San F ancisco, CA, USA), di e en ia ed by hei leng h and diame e alues (Table 1). The
implan s had a h ead ha ex ended h oughou he leng h o he implan body o which a
second h ead was added in he p oximal a ea (close o i s neck), bo h wi h a ec angula
p o ile. In he implan body, wo helical g oo es we e ex ended o enable sel - apping
in o he maxilla y bone. Fu he mo e, o de e mine he in luence o i s dimensions on
i s biomechanical beha io , he leng h o he h eaded po ion (implan body, L) and he
diame e o i s neck (D) we e a ied (Table 1).
Figu e 1. The cylind ical implan design used in he simula ions and i s main pa ame e s.
Ma e ials 2025,18, 2692 5 o 20
Table 1. Expe imen al design.
Expe imen al Run Implan Pa ame e
D (mm) L (mm)
A 3.7 8
B 3.7 10
C 3.7 12
D 4.0 8
E 4.0 10
F 4.0 12
2.2. The Assembly o he C own Den al Implan Sys em
To place he implan s, he maxilla model ob ained by Pé ez om medical image
p ocessing was used [
57
]. The maxilla model, including adjacen ee h o he p emola , was
modeled as a single solid body. Cu s we e made o he model, and a geome y smoo hing
p ocess was ca ied ou a he limi s o he p emola a ea o acili a e p ocessing in he
simula ion so wa e.
In Au odesk In en o so wa e, he six den al implan models we e assembled wi h a
ce amic c own, co esponding o he second p emola . Then, h eaded holes we e designed
in he jaw acco ding o he dimensions o each den al implan , and he c own den al implan
sys ems we e placed in hese o o m ou assemblies. Subsequen ly, he assemblies we e
expo ed in .sa o ma o he Abaqus/CAE simula ion so wa e (6.13).
2.3. Analysis Using he Fini e Elemen Me hod
The on Mises equi alen s ess (VMES) and on Mises s ain alues (VMS) in he
co ical and abecula bones we e ob ained by he FEA using he Abaqus/CAE simula ion
so wa e (Simulia Co p, Vélizy-Villacoublay, F ance, e sion 6.13). The sys em componen s
we e expo ed o Abaqus as sepa a e pa s, whe e ma e ial de ini ions we e es ablished
and he mechanical p ope ies speci ied in Table 2we e assigned. Co ical and abecula
bone ( ype II quali y) we e modeled wi h aniso opic ma e ial p ope ies, while iso opic
p ope ies we e assigned o he implan and c own. Addi ionally, all ma e ials we e ea ed
as homogeneous olumes exhibi ing linea elas ic beha io .
Table 2. The p ope ies o he ma e ials used in he sys em componen s.
Ma e ial Young’s Modulus,
E (MPa)
Shea Modulus,
G (MPa)
Poisson’s Ra io,
νRe e ences
Ti6Al4V
(den al implan ) 110,000 - 0.32 [58]
Ti35Nb7Z 5Ta (β-Ti)
(den al implan ) 55,000 - 0.32 [59]
Feldspa hic ce amic
(c own) 82,800 - 0.35 [60]
Co ical bone
Ex = 17,900 *
Ey = 26,600
Ez = 12,500
Gyx = 4500
Gyz = 7100
Gxz= 5300
νxy = 0.26
νxz = 0.31
νyz = 0.28 [61]
T abecula bone
Ex = 1148
Ey = 1148
Ez = 21
Gyx = 68
Gyz = 434
Gxz = 68
νxy = 0.05
νxz = 0.055
νyz = 0.322
* X—bucco-lingual di ec ion; Y—mesio-dis al di ec ion; Z—axial di ec ion (in e o-supe io ).
In e ac ions we e es ablished be ween he con ac su aces o he sys em componen s,
conside ing he physical unions ha exis be ween hese elemen s, wi h he use o a Tie
Ma e ials 2025,18, 2692 6 o 20
ype es ic ion, which implies ha he condi ion o he de ined su aces is a single one. A
global mesh (Figu e 2a), wi h e ahed al elemen s wi h an app oxima e size o 0.7 mm
was implemen ed, whe eas a locally e ined mesh wi h a size o 0.2 mm was used on
con ac su aces. The numbe o nodes and sys em elemen s in all simula ions depends
on he size o he mesh and a ies acco ding o changes in implan geome y. The sys em
wi h he smalles implan dimensions (3.7 and 8 mm) has he lowes numbe o elemen s
and nodes (1,826,206 elemen s and 339,497 nodes), whe eas he sys em wi h he la ges
implan dimensions (4.0 and 12 mm) exhibi s he highes alues o hese pa ame e s
(1,888,761 elemen s and 349,037 nodes). To gua an ee he accu acy o he s ess and s ain
alues ob ained, a con e gence es was ca ied ou , main aining he load and bounda y
condi ions. In his es , a e ahed al mesh wi h a e inemen o 0.16 mm was used o he
con ac su aces, and a e inemen o 0.6 mm was used in he global mesh. The esul was
an e o o less han 2%.
Figu e 2. The ancho age o he den al implan in he maxilla wi h he sys em mesh (a) and bounda y
condi ions and he di ec ion o he loads used in he simula ions (b).
A delayed loading condi ion was simula ed, conside ing he implan as ully osseoin e-
g a ed. Mul idi ec ional occlusal loads we e applied simul aneously along h ee ana omical
axes: axial (117 N), bucco-lingual (21.58 N), and mesio-dis al (29.48 N). Conside ing ha
he implan was ancho ed a he second p emola si e, he applied loads sligh ly inc eased
compa ed o hose used by Himmlo á e al. o a i s p emola [
62
]. The occlusal su ace
was modeled as he en i e c own su ace o he p emola , wi h loads applied ac oss a se
o 30 nodes dis ibu ed on mos o i s geome y o ensu e physiologically ep esen a i e
o ce applica ion (Figu e 2b). This app oach allowed o balanced load ansmission while
accoun ing o ana omical a iabili y (e.g., cusp inclina ion and ma ginal idges) o ensu e
p ope load dis ibu ion. By conside ing he en i e occlusal su ace a he han isola ed
con ac poin s, he model mo e accu a ely eplica es
in i o
loading condi ions, whe e
mas ica ion o ces a e dis ibu ed ac oss he c own. Bounda y condi ions we e imple-
men ed by ully cons aining he bone model, es ic ing all deg ees o eedom o simula e
embedded condi ions.
2.4. Expe imen al Design and S a is ical Analysis
This s udy e alua ed he in luence o wo key pa ame e s on he s ess and s ain
le els in pe i-implan co ical and abecula bone. Th ee di e en h eaded po ion leng hs
(Ls) and wo implan neck diame e s (Ds) we e analyzed using he ini e elemen me hod
simula ions. Consequen ly, he expe imen al design consis ed o six es con igu a ions, as
de ailed in Table 1. The diame e and leng h pa ame e alues used in he simula ed den al
implan models all wi hin he anges used in implan s p oduced by a ious comme cial
manu ac u e s. Howe e , o he leng h alues, expe imen al uns A and D a e conside ed
sho implan s. Six expe imen al uns we e pe o med using he Ti6Al4V alloy, supple-
Ma e ials 2025,18, 2692 7 o 20
men ed by wo addi ional uns (smalles and la ges implan designs A and F) employing
β- i anium Ti35Nb7Z 5Ta.
All s ess and s ain alues we e ex ac ed om he expe imen al uns in he abecula
and co ical bones, and he 300 mos loaded nodes gene a ed by each expe imen al un
we e selec ed o e alua e he biomechanics o he den al implan . The selec ed nodes
we e compiled in Mic oso O ice Excel; subsequen ly, he da a shee s we e expo ed o
S a G aphics Cen u ion XIX so wa e ( .19) (S a poin Technologies Inc., Wa en on, VA,
USA). In his so wa e, box-and-whiske analysis was used o de e mine he VMES and
abe an VMS alues. The alues we e subjec ed o a no mali y es (Kolmogo o –Smi no
es ) and subsequen ly analyzed using an analysis o a iance (ANOVA). Addi ionally, a
K uskal–Wallis es was used o iden i y di e ences be ween g oups, and a alue o
p< 0.05
conside ed s a is ically signi ican .
3. Resul s and Discussion
3.1. S ess and S ain Dis ibu ion Pa e ns in Co ical Bone Using Ti6Al4V (α+βTi)
The VMES dis ibu ions and VMS dis ibu ions gene a ed in co ical bone by he
expe imen al uns a e p esen ed in Figu es 3and 4. All e alua ed models p oduced
simila dis ibu ion pa e ns o bo h pa ame e s, cha ac e ized by peak concen a ions in
pe i-implan bone, pa icula ly in he maxilla y supe io egion adjacen o he implan
necks. This obse ed beha io aligns wi h he indings epo ed in p e ious s udies
in ol ing a ini e elemen analysis o den al implan s [
40
,
63
,
64
]. The maximum alues
o bo h mechanical pa ame e s we e consis en ly loca ed a ound he dis al aspec , while
he minimum alues occu ed p edominan ly in a eas in e acing wi h abecula bone.
Rega ding he supe io maxilla y egion, he peak alues o on Mises equi alen s esses
(MVMES) and s ains (MVMS) demons a ed dimensional dependence, which a ied
acco ding o implan geome ic pa ame e s.
Figu e 3. The dis ibu ion o on Mises equi alen s esses in he ex e nal su ace o co ical bone
su ounding he Ti6Al4V (
α
+
β
Ti) den al implan . No e: The le e s indica e he expe imen al un
(see Table 1).
Ma e ials 2025,18, 2692 8 o 20
Figu e 4. The on Mises s ain dis ibu ion in he ex e nal su ace o co ical bone adjacen o he
Ti6Al4V (α+βTi) den al implan . The le e s indica e he expe imen al un (see Table 1).
S ess and S ain Dis ibu ion Pa e ns in Co ical Bone Using Ti35Nb7Z 5Ta (β-Ti)
Figu e 5shows he on Mises s ess and s ain dis ibu ions in co ical bone o
implan s wi h smalle and la ge dimensions ( uns A and F). Bo h implan designs p oduced
simila s ess and s ain pa e ns unde he same condi ions, showing simila esul s o
hose gene a ed by Ti6Al4V den al implan s and p esen ing he highes alues concen a ed
in he pe i-implan bone, a ound he implan neck in he supe io maxilla. These esul s a e
consis en wi h p e ious ini e elemen s udies o den al implan s [
40
,
59
,
60
]. The maximum
alues o VMES and VMS we e obse ed a he dis al si e, while he lowes alues we e
ound in egions adjacen o abecula bone. In he supe io maxilla y a ea, he peak
magni udes o VMES (MVMES) and VMS (MVMS) exhibi ed dimensional dependence,
co ela ing wi h a ia ions in implan geome y.
Ma e ials 2025,18, 2692 9 o 20
Figu e 5. The dis ibu ion o on Mises equi alen s esses (S) and on Mises s ains (E) in he
ex e nal su ace o pe i-implan co ical bone using he Ti35Nb7Z 5Ta (
β
-Ti) implan . The le e s
indica e he expe imen al un (see Table 1).
3.2. Dis ibu ion Pa e ns o S esses and S ains in T abecula Bone Using Ti6Al4V (α+βTi)
Figu es 6and 7p esen he VMES and VMS dis ibu ions in he abecula bone o
all expe imen al con igu a ions. The peak alues o bo h pa ame e s we e concen a ed
p ima ily in wo egions: (1) in he in e ace wi h he apical zone o he implan , and
(2) o
s ain dis ibu ions speci ically, he h eaded implan su ace a he dis al si e. This
mechanical beha io s ems om he geome y o he h ead ac ing as a s ess concen a ion
ea u e due o i s complex h ee-dimensional mo phology.
The implan models p oduced compa able s ess and s ain dis ibu ion pa e ns in
he abecula bone, wi h educed alues o bo h mechanical pa ame e s obse ed in
egions in e acing wi h he double- h eaded po ion. Howe e , a ian s C and F (which
ea u e longe s em leng hs) demons a ed mo e uni o m dis ibu ion pa e ns. Speci ically,
hese con igu a ions showed diminished di e ences be ween VMES and VMS alues when
compa ing dis al e sus mesial si es, as well as be ween pe i-implan bone egions adjacen
o apical e sus p oximal implan sec ions.
Dis ibu ion Pa e ns o S esses and S ains in T abecula Bone Using Ti35Nb7Z 5Ta (
β
-Ti)
The FEA o he VMES and VMS dis ibu ions in abecula bone o he la ges and
smalles implan dimensions ab ica ed using Ti35Nb7Z 5Ta (
β
-Ti) a e shown in Figu e 8.
Consis en wi h he simula ions using he Ti6Al4V alloy, he implan wi h he la ges
leng h and diame e dimensions (F) exhibi ed a signi ican educ ion in he peak VMES
and VMS alues in he abecula bone compa ed o hose gene a ed by a ian A. Highe
VMES alues we e ound a he bone–implan in e ace nea he apical egion, while
peak VMS alues we e concen a ed a ound he dis al h eads, likely due o he ab up
changes in geome y. These esul s highligh he combined mechanical e ec o implan
ea u es: he apical engagemen suppo s p ima y s abili y, while he h ead design a ec s
Ma e ials 2025,18, 2692 16 o 20
o s ess dis ibu ion. These indings highligh ha while
β
-Ti o e s heo e ical ad an-
ages o bone emodeling, i s clinical applica ion equi es ca e ul conside a ion o implan
design and pa ien bone quali y o p e en ha m ul o e loads, pa icula ly in abecula
bone egions.
Fo he clinical implemen a ion o he de eloping implan model, e idence sugges s
p e e en ial selec ion o implan a ian s o maximum diame e and maximum leng h,
con ingen on adequa e dimensions o he ecipien jawbone. Howe e , se e al s udy
limi a ions cons ain he di ec clinical ex apola ion o hese indings. Fi s , he simula ion
me hodology used s a ic loading condi ions unde delayed loading assump ions. Second,
c i ical a iables including pe i-implan bone quali y a ia ions and implan posi ioning
wi hin he jaw we e no inco po a ed in he biomechanical analysis. Consequen ly, u u e
esea ch should ocus on (1) using FEM o in es iga e he e ec s o hese unexamined
a iables on pe i-implan s ess/s ain dis ibu ions and (2) alida ing cu en indings
h ough expe imen al es ing, including con olled in i o expe imen a ion.
4. Conclusions
This in es iga ion employed ini e elemen analysis o assess he biomechanical pe -
o mance o a no el den al implan design, wi h pa icula ocus on e alua ing how he
implan leng h and diame e in luence MVMES and MVMS in pe i-implan bone. The main
indings a e as ollows:
1.
Peak s ess concen a ions occu ed in pe i-implan co ical bone, pa icula ly in he
maxilla y su ace egion adjacen o he implan neck. This mechanical beha io
s ems om he ele a ed Young’s modulus o he co ical bone, which enhances i s
load-bea ing capaci y. On he con a y, he maximum s ain alues we e localized in
he abecula bone egions.
2.
Bo h heimplan diame e andleng hdemons a eds a is ically signi ican e ec s(
p< 0.05
)
on he peak equi alen s ess and s ain alues in co ical and abecula bone.
3.
Implan diame e eme ged as he dominan a iable a ec ing mechanical esponse,
a ibu able o inc eased implan –bone con ac a ea ha p omo es load dissipa ion
and consequen ly educes pe i-implan s ess/s ain magni udes.
4.
Supe io biomechanical ou comes consis en ly co ela ed wi h la ge implan dimen-
sions, sugges ing enhanced clinical pe o mance po en ial o c own–implan sys ems
ea u ing maximum diame e and leng h con igu a ions.
5.
The ma e ial o he den al implan demons a ed a s a is ically signi ican in luence
(
p< 0.05
) on he maximum le els o s ess and s ain gene a ed in he co ical and a-
becula bones. In gene al, he Ti35Nb7Z 5Ta alloy implan s showed highe maximum
alues o VMES and VMS han hose gene a ed by Ti6Al4V alloy implan s.
Au ho Con ibu ions: P.G.-M.: Concep ualiza ion, Me hodology, In es iga ion, Fo mal Analysis,
Valida ion, and W i ing—O iginal D a . J.R.-G.: In es iga ion, Concep ualiza ion, Me hodology,
Fo mal Analysis, Valida ion, and W i ing—O iginal D a . J.E.G.: P ojec Adminis a ion, Concep ual-
iza ion, Me hodology, Supe ision, W i ing—O iginal D a , and W i ing—Re iew and Edi ing. A.P.:
Me hodology, W i ing—O iginal D a , and W i ing—Re iew and Edi ing. Y.T.: Concep ualiza ion,
P ojec Adminis a ion, Supe ision, Me hodology, W i ing—O iginal D a , and W i ing—Re iew
and Edi ing. All au ho s ha e ead and ag eed o he published e sion o he manusc ip .
Funding: This publica ion is pa o p ojec PID2022-137911OB-I00, unded by MICIU/AEI/10.13039/
501100011033 and by ERDF/EU. Also, he Minis y o Science and Inno a ion o Spain o hei
con ibu ion o he p ojec h ough g an PDC2022-133369-I00, as well as, he p ojec PN385LH007-
035: 9827 o he Cuban Na ional Science and Technology p og am: Bio- echnology, Pha maceu ical
Indus y, and Medical Technologies.
Ma e ials 2025,18, 2692 17 o 20
Ins i u ional Re iew Boa d S a emen : No applicable.
In o med Consen S a emen : No applicable.
Da a A ailabili y S a emen : The o iginal con ibu ions p esen ed in his s udy a e included in he
a icle. Fu he inqui ies can be di ec ed o he co esponding au ho s.
Acknowledgmen s: The au ho s would like o hank he labo a o y echnicians a he Uni e si y o
Se ille o hei suppo in cha ac e izing he implan p o o ypes unde de elopmen o co obo a e
he esul s o he ini e elemen models p esen ed in his wo k.
Con lic s o In e es : The au ho s decla e no con lic s o in e es .
Abb e ia ions
The ollowing abb e ia ions a e used in his manusc ip :
FEA Fini e elemen analysis
VMES on Mises equi alen s ess
VMS on Mises s ain
MVMES Maximum on Mises equi alen s ess
MVMS Maximum on Mises s ain
Re e ences
1.
Alghamdi, H.S.; Jansen, J.A. The de elopmen and u u e o den al implan s. Den . Ma e . J. 2020,39, 167–172. [C ossRe ]
[PubMed]
2.
Bazli, L.; Kho amabadi, H.N.; Chaha dehi, A.M.; A sad, H.; Malekpou i, B.; Jazi, M.A.; Azizabadi, N. Fac o s in luencing he
ailu e o den al implan s: A Sys ema ic Re iew. J. Compos. Compd. 2019,2, 18–25. [C ossRe ]
3.
Yang, Y.; Hu, H.; Zeng, M.; Chu, H.; Gan, Z.; Duan, J.; Rong, M. The su i al a es and isk ac o s o implan s in he ea ly s age:
A e ospec i e s udy. BMC O al Heal h 2021,21, 293. [C ossRe ]
4.
Hasanoglu E basa , G.N.; Hocao˘glu, T.P.; E basa , R.C. Risk ac o s associa ed wi h sho den al implan success: A long- e m
e ospec i e e alua ion o pa ien s ollowed up o up o 9 yea s. B az. O al Res. 2019,33, e030. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
5.
K isam, J.; O , L.; Schmi z, S.; Klo z, A.-L.; Seyidaliye a, A.; Rammelsbe g, P.; Zen hö e , A. Fac o s a ec ing he ea ly ailu e o
implan s placed in a den al p ac ice wi h a specializa ion in implan ology–a e ospec i e s udy. BMC O al Heal h 2019,19, 208.
[C ossRe ]
6.
Nimbalka , S.; Dha ak, P.; Ghe de, C.; Joshi, S. A e iew a icle on ac o s a ec ing bone loss in den al implan s. Ma e . Today
P oc. 2021,43, 970–976. [C ossRe ]
7.
¸Sahin, T. The e ec o indi iduals’ o al hygiene habi s and knowledge le els on pe i-implan heal h and disease: A ques ionnai e-
based obse a ional s udy. BMC O al Heal h 2024,24, 443. [C ossRe ]
8.
Malmq is , S.; E denbo g, J.; Johannsen, G.; Johannsen, A. Pa ien ’s expe iences o den al implan s, pe i-implan i is and i s
ea men -A quali a i e in e iew s udy. In . J. Den . Hyg. 2024,22, 530–539. [C ossRe ]
9.
Co ellini, S.; Fa il, C.; De Nu e, M.; Teughels, W.; Qui ynen, M. Pa ien compliance as a isk ac o o he ou come o implan
ea men . Pe iodon ology 2000 2019,81, 209–225. [C ossRe ]
10. Sadowsky, S.J. Occlusal o e load wi h den al implan s: A e iew. In . J. Implan Den . 2019,5, 29. [C ossRe ]
11. Robinson, D.; Aguila , L.; Ga i, A.; Abduo, J.; Lee, P.V.S.; Ackland, D. Load esponse o he na u al oo h and den al implan : A
compa a i e biomechanics s udy. J. Ad . P os hodon . 2019,11, 169–178. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
12.
Szajek, K.; Wie szycki, M. Sc ew p eload loss unde occlusal load as a p edic o o loosening isk in a ying den al implan
designs. J. Mech. Beha . Biomed. Ma e . 2023,148, 106165. [C ossRe ]
13.
Pé ez-Pe ida, E.; Chá a i-P ado, D.; Diéguez-Pe ei a, M.; Es ada-Ma ínez, A.; Mon albán-Vadillo, O.; Jiménez-Ga udo, A.
Consequences o pe i-implan bone loss in he occlusal load ans e o he suppo ing bone in e ms o magni ude o s ess,
s ain, and s ess dis ibu ion: A ini e elemen analysis. BioMed Res. In . 2021,2021, 3087071. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
14.
Delgado-Ruiz, R.A.; Cal o-Gui ado, J.L.; Romanos, G.E. E ec s o occlusal o ces on he pe i-implan -bone in e ace s abili y.
Pe iodon ology 2000 2019,81, 179–193. [C ossRe ]
15.
Bagegni, A.; Abou-Ayash, S.; Rücke , G.; Alga ny, A.; A , W. The in luence o p os he ic ma e ial on implan and p os he ic
su i al o implan -suppo ed ixed comple e den u es: A sys ema ic e iew and me a-analysis. J. P os hodon . Res. 2019,
63, 251–265. [C ossRe ]
Ma e ials 2025,18, 2692 18 o 20
16.
Misch, C.E.; Resnik, R.R. A ailable bone and den al implan ea men plans. In Misch’s Con empo a y Implan Den is y, 4 h ed.;
Else ie : Ams e dam, The Ne he lands, 2020; p. 415.
17.
Rues, S.; Schmi e , M.; Kappel, S.; Sonn ag, R.; K e ze , J.P.; Nado , J. E ec o bone quali y and quan i y on he p ima y s abili y
o den al implan s in a simula ed bico ical placemen . Clin. O al In es ig. 2020,25, 1265–1272. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
18.
Kowalski, J.; Lapinska, B.; Nissan, J.; Lukomska-Szymanska, M. Fac o s In luencing Ma ginal Bone Loss a ound Den al Implan s:
A Na a i e Re iew. Coa ings 2021,11, 865. [C ossRe ]
19.
Di S e ano, D.A.; A osio, P.; Cappa è, P.; Ba bon, S.; Ghe lone, E.F. Ghe lone, S abili y o den al implan s and hickness o co ical
bone: Clinical esea ch and u u e pe spec i es. A sys ema ic e iew. Ma e ials 2021,14, 7183. [C ossRe ]
20.
Cla o , S.; Ch is ensen, B.J.; Chapple, A.G.; Block, M.S. Block, P edic ion o esidual al eola bone heigh in he pos e io maxilla
a e den al ex ac ions. J. O al Maxillo ac. Su g. 2021,80, 517–524. [C ossRe ]
21.
Toledano, M.; Fe nández-Rome o, E.; Vallecillo, C.; Toledano, R.; Oso io, M.T.; Vallecillo-Ri as, M. Sho e sus s anda d implan s
a sinus augmen ed si es: A sys ema ic e iew and me a-analysis. Clin. O al In es ig. 2022,26, 6681–6698. [C ossRe ]
22.
Pa k, S.; Pa k, J.; Kang, I.; Lee, H.; Noh, G. E ec s o assessing he bone emodeling p ocess in biomechanical ini e elemen
s abili y e alua ions o den al implan s. Compu . Me hods P og ams Biomed. 2022,221, 106852. [C ossRe ]
23.
I andous , S.; Mü ü, S. The in e play be ween bone healing and emodeling a ound den al implan s. Sci. Rep. 2020,10, 4335.
[C ossRe ] [PubMed]
24. Flanagan, D. Osseous emodeling a ound den al implan s. J. O al Implan . 2019,45, 239–246. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
25.
Ghe de, C.; Dha ak, P.; Nimbalka , S.; Joshi, S. A comp ehensi e e iew o ac o s a ec ing a igue li e o den al implan s. Ma e .
Today P oc. 2020,43, 1117–1123. [C ossRe ]
26.
Ziaie, B.; Khalili, S.M.R. E alua ion o a igue li e o den al implan s using FEM analysis. P os hesis 2021,3, 300–313. [C ossRe ]
27. A ai, Y.; Takashima, M.; Ma suzaki, N.; Takada, S. Ma ginal bone loss in den al implan s: A li e a u e e iew o isk ac o s and
ea men s a egies o p e en ion. J. P os hodon . Res. 2024,69, 12–20. [C ossRe ]
28.
Gu en, S.S.; Cabba , F.; Gule , N. Local and sys emic ac o s associa ed wi h ma ginal bone loss a ound den al implan s: A
e ospec i e clinical s udy. Quin essence In . 2020,51, 128–141.
29.
Alemayehu, D.-B.; Jeng, Y.-R. Th ee-dimensional ini e elemen in es iga ion in o e ec s o implan h ead design and loading
a e on s ess dis ibu ion in den al implan s and aniso opic bone. Ma e ials 2021,14, 6974. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
30.
Ishak, M.I.; Daud, R.; Ib ahim, I.; Ma , F.; Manso , N.N. Manso , Biomechanical o e loading ac o s in luencing he ailu e o
den al implan s: A e iew. In Symposium on Damage Mechanism in Ma e ials and S uc u es; Sp inge : Be lin/Heidelbe g, Ge many,
2020; pp. 127–142.
31.
Lo a o, S.T.; Bassani, R.; Sa kis-Ono e, R.; dos San os, M.B.F. In luence o di e en implan geome y in clinical longe i y and
main enance o ma ginal bone: A sys ema ic e iew. J. P os hodon . 2018,28, e713–e721. [C ossRe ]
32.
Filho, L.C.D.C.; Fao , F.; Mad uga, M.d.M.; Ma cello-Machado, R.M.; Bo din, D.; Cu y, A.A.D.B. E ec o implan mac ogeome y
on pe i-implan healing ou comes: A andomized clinical ial. Clin. O al In es ig. 2018,23, 567–575. [C ossRe ]
33.
K e e, S.; Fe ei a, I.; Valen e, M.L.d.C.; dos Reis, A.C. Rela ionship be ween den al implan mac o-design and osseoin eg a ion:
A sys ema ic e iew. O al Maxillo ac. Su g. 2022,28, 1–14. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
34.
He e o-Climen , M.; López-Ja ana, P.; Lemos, B.F.; Gil, F.J.; Falcão, C.; Ríos-San os, J.V.; Ríos-Ca asco, B. Rele an design aspec s
o imp o e he s abili y o i anium den al implan s. Ma e ials 2020,13, 1910. [C ossRe ]
35.
Ani ua, E.; de Iba a, N.L.S.; Ma ín, I.M.; Ro aeche, L.S. In luence o den al implan diame e and bone quali y on he biomechan-
ics o single-c own es o a ion. A ini e elemen analysis. Den . J. 2021,9, 103. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
36.
Elleuch, S.; J ad, H.; Kessen ini, A.; Wali, M.; Dammak, F. Design op imiza ion o implan geome ical cha ac e is ics enhancing
p ima y s abili y using FEA o s ess dis ibu ion a ound den al p os hesis. Compu . Me hods Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 2021,
24, 1035–1051. [C ossRe ]
37.
Büyük, F.N.; Sa an, E.; Ka pa , F. Re iew on ini e elemen analysis o den al implan s. J. Den . Implan Res. 2022,41, 50–63.
[C ossRe ]
38.
Falcinelli, C.; Valen e, F.; Vas a, M.; T aini, T. Fini e elemen analysis in implan den is y: S a e o he a and u u e di ec ions.
Den . Ma e . 2023,39, 539–556. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
39.
Kudagi, V.; Shi akuma , S.; Talwade, P. Applica ions o ini e elemen analysis in den is y: A e iew. J. In . O al Heal h 2021,
13, 415–422. [C ossRe ]
40.
Cas illa, R.; Fo e o, L.; González-Es ada, O.A. Compa a i e s udy o he in luence o den al implan design on he s ess and
s ain dis ibu ion using he ini e elemen me hod. J. Phys. Con . Se . 2019,1159, 012016. [C ossRe ]
41.
And ee ich, S.Y.; Zu abo ich, C.D.; Mikhailo ich, A.V. The usage o he ini e elemen analysis in he design o new den al
implan sys ems. In . J. Inno . Med. 2023,1, 19–23.
42.
Lee, H.; Jo, M.; Noh, G. Biomechanical e ec s o den al implan diame e , connec ion ype, and bone densi y on mic ogap
o ma ion and a igue ailu e: A ini e elemen analysis. Compu . Me hods P og ams Biomed. 2021,200, 105863. [C ossRe ]
Ma e ials 2025,18, 2692 19 o 20
43.
Fio illo, L.; Cicciù, M.; D’amico, C.; Mauce i, R.; O e i, G.; Ce ino, G. Fini e elemen me hod and on mises in es iga ion on
bone esponse o dynamic s ess wi h a no el conical den al implan connec ion. BioMed Res. In . 2020,2020, 2976067. [C ossRe ]
[PubMed]
44.
Pamme , D. E alua ion o pos ope a i e den al implan p ima y s abili y using 3D ini e elemen analysis. Compu . Me hods
Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 2019,22, 280–287. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
45.
Shaki , S.M.; Muhsin, S.A.; Al Ma za, R. Fini e Elemen Modelling Based S udies o Den al Implan s: Sys ema ic Re iew. J. Tech.
2022,4, 155–169. [C ossRe ]
46.
Vanaclocha, V.; A ienza, C.; Vanaclocha, A.; Peñuelas, A.; Gómez-He e o, J.; Pé ez-Ca ió, F.; Diego-Leyda, J.A.; Sáiz-Sapena, N.;
Vanaclocha, L. New Subpe ios eal Den al Implan Design wi h Fini e Elemen Analysis and Mechanical Valida ion: A Design
Valida ion S udy. Ma e ials 2025,18, 622. [C ossRe ]
47.
Cheng, Y.-C.; Lin, D.-H.; Jiang, C.-P.; Lee, S.-Y. Design imp o emen and dynamic ini e elemen analysis o no el ITI den al
implan unde dynamic chewing loads. Bio-Med. Ma e . Eng. 2015,26, S555–S561. [C ossRe ]
48.
Domme i, V.K.; P amanik, S.; Roy, S. Design o cus omized coa ed den al implan s using ini e elemen analysis. Den . Med. P obl.
2023,60, 385–392. [C ossRe ]
49.
Pa il, V.; Naik, N. A compa a i e s udy on he e ec o s ess in den al implan s uc u e using ini e elemen analysis. In . J. Mech.
P od. Eng. Res. De . 2019,9, 709–717.
50.
Ne o, J.V.C.; Celles, C.A.S.; de And ade, C.S.A.F.; A onso, C.R.M.; Nagay, B.E.; Ba ão, V.A.R. Recen ad ances and p ospec s in
β- ype i anium alloys o den al implan s applica ions. ACS Bioma e . Sci. Eng. 2024,10, 6029–6060. [C ossRe ]
51.
Mao, C.; Yu, W.; Jin, M.; Wang, Y.; Shang, X.; Lin, L.; Zeng, X.; Wang, L.; Lu, E. Mechanobiologically op imized Ti–35Nb–2Ta–3Z
imp o es load ansduc ion and enhances bone emodeling in il ed den al implan he apy. Bioac . Ma e . 2022,16, 15–26.
52.
Ale izakos, V.; Mi o , G.; Ah ens, A.; on See, C. The in luence o implan si e p epa a ion and s e iliza ion on he pe o mance
and wea o implan d ills. In . J. O al Maxillo ac. Implan 2021,36, 546–552. [C ossRe ]
53.
Nandini, N.; Kunuso h, R.; Alwala, A.M.; P akash, R.; Samp ee hi, S.; Ka ku i, S. Cylind ical Implan Ve sus Tape ed Implan : A
Compa a i e S udy. Cu eus 2022,14, e29675. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
54.
Rugo a, S.; Abboud, M. The mal E alua ion o Bone D illing wi h a One-D ill P o ocol. Bioenginee ing 2024,11, 1022. [C ossRe ]
[PubMed]
55.
obau-Po ua, A.; González, J.E.; Rod íguez-Gue a, J.; González-Mede os, P.; Na a o, P.; de la Rosa, J.E.; Ca bonell-González,
M.; A aneda-He nández, E.; To es, Y. Biomechanical beha io o a new design o den al implan : In luence o he po osi y and
loca ion in he maxilla. J. Ma e . Res. Technol. 2024,29, 3255–3267. [C ossRe ]
56.
Robau-Po ua, A.; González, J.E.; A ancibia-Cas illo, R.; Pica do, A.; A aneda-He nández, E.; To es, Y. Design, ab ica ion,
and cha ac e iza ion o no el den al implan s wi h po osi y g adien ob ained by Selec i e Lase Mel ing. Ma e . Des. 2025,
251, 113660.
57.
Rod íguez, Y.; Ruíz, J.G.; Ruiz-Val e de, O.; Pé ez-Ál a ez, M. Simula ion o he in luence o he pla o m swi ching o a
model o den al implan on he bio-mechanics o maxilla y bones. In P oceedings o he Den al Implan s, Chicago, IL, USA,
29 No embe 2018.
58.
Pé ez-Pe ida, E.; B izuela-Velasco, A.; Chá a i-P ado, D.; Jiménez-Ga udo, A.; Sánchez-Lashe as, F.; Solabe ie a-Méndez,
E.; Diéguez-Pe ei a, M.; Fe nández-González, F.J.; Dehesa-Iba a, B.; Mon icelli, F. Biomechanical Consequences o he Elas ic
P ope ies o Den al Implan Alloys on he Suppo ing Bone: Fini e Elemen Analysis. BioMed Res. In . 2016,2016, 1850401.
[C ossRe ]
59.
Elhadad, A.A.; Rome o-Resendiz, L.; Rossi, M.; Rod íguez-Albelo, L.; Lascano, S.; A onso, C.R.; Alcudia, A.; Amigó, V.; To es,
Y. Findings and pe spec i es o
β
-Ti alloys wi h biomedical applica ions: Explo ing beyond biomechanical and bio unc ional
beha iou . J. Ma e . Res. Technol. 2024,33, 3550–3618. [C ossRe ]
60.
Pellizze , E.P.; Lemos, C.A.A.; Almeida, D.A.F.; Ba is a, V.E.D.S.; Júnio , J.F.S.; Ve i, F.R. Biomechanical analysis o di e en
implan -abu men s in e aces in di e en bone ypes: An in silico analysis. Ma e . Sci. Eng. C 2018,90, 645–650. [C ossRe ]
61.
Hussein, M.O. Biomechanical analysis o di e en implan -o e den u e loading p o ocols unde dynamic loads. J. Am. Sci. 2013,
9, 8.
62.
Himmlo á, L.; Dos álo á, T.; Káco ský, A.; Kon iˇcko á, S. In luence o implan leng h and diame e on s ess dis ibu ion: A
ini e elemen analysis. J. P os he . Den . 2004,91, 20–25. [C ossRe ]
63.
Yemineni, B.C.; Mahend a, J.; Nasina, J.; Mahend a, L.; Shi asub amanian, L.; Pe ika, S.B. E alua ion o maximum p incipal
s ess, on mises s ess, and de o ma ion on su ounding mandibula bone du ing inse ion o an implan : A h ee-dimensional
ini e elemen s udy. Cu eus 2020,12, e9430. [C ossRe ]
64.
T e o, P.H.W.; dos San os, M.B.F.; Spazzin, A.O.; Pe ei a, G.K.R.; Bacchi, A. Assessmen o s ess/s ain in den al implan s and
abu men s o al e na i e ma e ials compa ed o con en ional i anium alloy—3D non-linea ini e elemen analysis. Compu .
Me hods Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 2020,23, 372–383. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
Ma e ials 2025,18, 2692 20 o 20
65.
Li, J.; Jansen, J.A.; Walboome s, X.F.; an den Beucken, J.J. Mechanical aspec s o den al implan s and osseoin eg a ion: A na a i e
e iew. J. Mech. Beha . Biomed. Ma e . 2020,103, 103574. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
66.
Gao, X.; F aulob, M.; Haïa , G. Biomechanical beha iou s o he bone–implan in e ace: A e iew. J. R. Soc. In e ace 2019,
16, 20190259. [C ossRe ]
67.
Li, R.; Wu, Z.; Chen, S.; Li, X.; Wan, Q.; Xie, G.; Pei, X. Biomechanical beha io analysis o ou ypes o sho implan s wi h
di e en placemen dep hs using he ini e elemen me hod. J. P os he . Den . 2023,129, 447.e1–447.e10. [C ossRe ]
68.
Robau-Po ua, A.; Pé ez-Rod íguez, Y.; So is-Rod íguez, L.M.; Pé ez-Acos a, O.; González, J.E. The e ec o diame e , leng h and
elas ic modulus o a den al implan on s ess and s ain le els in pe i-implan bone: A 3D ini e elemen analysis. Bio-Med. Ma e .
Eng. 2020,30, 541–558. [C ossRe ]
69.
Song, K.; Wang, Z.; Lan, J.; Ma, S. Po ous s uc u e design and mechanical beha io analysis based on TPMS o cus omized oo
analogue implan . J. Mech. Beha . Biomed. Ma e . 2021,115, 104222. [C ossRe ]
70.
Ma ins, D.; Cou o, R.; Fonseca, E.M.; Ca ei as, A.R. Nume ical analysis o he mechanical s imuli ans e ed om a den al
implan o he bone. J. Compu . Appl. Res. Mech. Eng. (JCARME) 2021,11, 1–11.
71.
F os , H.M. Bone’s mechanos a : A 2003 upda e, The Ana omical eco d pa a: Disco e ies in molecula , cellula , and e olu iona y
biology: An o icial publica ion o he ame ican associa ion o ana omis s. Ana . Rec. 2003,275, 1081–1101. [C ossRe ]
72.
Baggi, L.; Cappelloni, I.; Di Gi olamo, M.; Mace i, F.; Vai o, G. The in luence o implan diame e and leng h on s ess dis ibu ion
o osseoin eg a ed implan s ela ed o c es al bone geome y: A h ee-dimensional ini e elemen analysis. J. P os he . Den . 2008,
100, 422–431. [C ossRe ]
73.
Ding, X.; Liao, S.; Zhu, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, L. E ec o diame e and leng h on s ess dis ibu ion o he al eola c es a ound
immedia e loading implan s. Clin. Implan Den . Rela . Res. 2009,11, 279–287. [C ossRe ]
74.
Muangsisied, S.; Chan a apanich, N.; Vee asakul, M.S.; Inglam, S. E ec o implan diame e and co ical bone hickness on
biomechanical pe o mance o sho den al implan -suppo ed dis al can ile e : A ini e elemen s udy. Eng. J. 2021,25, 175–182.
[C ossRe ]
75.
P emna h, K.; S ide i, J.; Kala a hy, N.; Naga anjani, P.; Sha mila, M.R. E alua ion o s ess dis ibu ion in bone o di e en
densi ies using di e en implan designs: A h ee-dimensional ini e elemen analysis. J. Indian P os hodon . Soc. 2012,13, 555–559.
[C ossRe ] [PubMed]
76.
Liao, S.-H.; Zhu, X.-H.; Xie, J.; Sohodeb, V.K.; Ding, X. In luence o T abecula Bone on Pe i-Implan S ess and S ain Based on
Mic o-CT Fini e Elemen Modeling o Beagle Dog. BioMed Res. In . 2016,2016, 3926941. [C ossRe ] [PubMed]
77.
Yuan, X.; Liu, Y.; Yang, Y.; Ren, M.; Luo, L.; Zheng, L.; Liu, Y. E ec o sho implan c own- o-implan a io on s ess dis ibu ion
in aniso opic bone wi h di e en osseoin eg a ion a es. BMC O al Heal h 2023,23, 683. [C ossRe ]
78.
Li, J.; Li, H.; Shi, L.; Fok, A.S.; Uce , C.; De lin, H.; Ho ne , K.; Silikas, N. A ma hema ical model o simula ing he bone
emodeling p ocess unde mechanical s imulus. Den . Ma e . 2007,23, 1073–1078. [C ossRe ]
Disclaime /Publishe ’s No e: The s a emen s, opinions and da a con ained in all publica ions a e solely hose o he indi idual
au ho (s) and con ibu o (s) and no o MDPI and/o he edi o (s). MDPI and/o he edi o (s) disclaim esponsibili y o any inju y o
people o p ope y esul ing om any ideas, me hods, ins uc ions o p oduc s e e ed o in he con en .
