International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 7 , ISSUE 1 ( January-March, 2017 ) > List of Articles


A Three-dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Stress Distribution in the Cortical Bone in Single Tooth Implant and Post Core-treated Tooth subjected to variable Loads

Honey Arora, Shahul Hameed

Citation Information : Arora H, Hameed S. A Three-dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Stress Distribution in the Cortical Bone in Single Tooth Implant and Post Core-treated Tooth subjected to variable Loads. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2017; 7 (1):8-16.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1168

Published Online: 01-08-2011

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2017; The Author(s).



In spite of many advances in the field of prosthetic dentistry, the choice of whether to treat and retain a grossly compromised tooth or to extract and replace with an implant is debatable. Alveolar bone preservation is one of the main criteria to select the treatment option. This is directly affected by the stress generated in the cortical bone under variable loads and is therefore, relevant.

Materials and methods

Two three-dimensional finite element models were generated in relation to maxillary second premolar using ANSYS software. Model-I was parallel-tapered titanium implant with screw-retained titanium abutment and porcelain fused to metal (PFM) crown. Model-P was fiber post and com- posite resin core with PFM crown. Luting cement was resin cement. Both the models were surrounded by homogeneous and isotropic cortical and cancellous bone, and were subjected to variable loads of 300, 400, and 500 N in axial (0°) and nonaxial (15°, 45°) directions.


Stress in the cortical bone in megapascal (MPa) in Model-I/Model-P when subjected to variable loads in newtons(N) in axial direction was 300 N - 37.6 MPa/47.3 MPa; 400 N - 50.2 MPa/63.0 MPa; 500 N - 62.7 MPa/63.0 MPa. 15°- 300 N - 68.5 MPa/65.9 MPa; 400 N - 91.3 MPa/87.9 MPa; 500 N - 114.2 MPa/87.9 MPa. 45° - 300 N - 136.3 MPa/88.9 MPa; 400 N - 181.8 MPa/118.5 MPa; 500 N - 227.2 MPa/118.5 MPa.


Within the limitation of this study, it was concluded that on axial loading, both the treatment modalities showed no significant difference, but on nonaxial loading, the cortical bone in the implant model showed to have considerably higher stress than post core-treated tooth model. Hence, given a choice, this study favors retaining and restoring a compromised tooth with post core and crown rather than extracting and replacing with an implant.

How to cite this article

Rao S, Arora H, Hameed S. A Three- dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Stress Distribution in the Cortical Bone in Single Tooth Implant and Post Core-treated Tooth subjected to variable Loads. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2017;7(1):8-16.

PDF Share
  1. Endodontic or dental implant therapy: the factors affecting treatment planning. J Am Dent Assoc 2006 Jul;137(7):973-977.
  2. Preservation of alveolar bone of un-restorable traumatized maxillary inci- sors for future. Refuat Hapeh Vehashinayim (1993) 2004 Jan;21(1):54-59, 101-102.
  3. Reasons for extractions in general practice. New Zealand Dent J 1960 Oct;56:182-183.
  4. Tooth retention and tooth loss in the permanent dentition of adults: United States, 1988-1991. J Dent Res 1996 Feb;75 Spec No: 684-695.
  5. Vertical root fractures in endodontically treated teeth: diagnostic signs and clinical management. Endodontic Topics 2006 Mar;13(1):84-94.
  6. Factors of bone resorption of the residual ridge. J Prosthet Dent 1962 May;12(3):429-440.
  7. Issues related to single-tooth implants. J Am Dent Assoc 1997 Oct;128(10):1383-1390.
  8. Implant or the natural tooth - a contemporary treatment planning dilemma? Aust Dent J 2007 Mar;52(Suppl 1):S138-S150.
  9. Comparison of success of implants versus endodontically treated teeth. J Endod 2008 Nov;34(11):1302-1305.
  10. Comparison of nonsurgical root canal treatment and single- tooth implants. J Endod 2009 Oct;35(10):1325-1330.
  11. A review of factors influencing treatment planning decisions of single-tooth implants versus preserving natural teeth with nonsurgical endodontic therapy. J Endod 2008 May;34(5):519-529.
  12. Morphologic characteristics of bony edentulous jaws. J Prosthodont 2007 Mar-Apr;16(2):141-147.
  13. Three- dimensional finite element analysis of the effect of different bone quality on stress distribution in an implant-supported crown. J Prosthet Dent 2005 Mar;93(3):227-234.
  14. A three dimensional finite element analysis of the effect of cortical bone thickness on the stress distribution around single unit osseointegrated implants. Int Dent SA 2006;8(5):50-54.
  15. Effect of implant size and shape on implant success rates: a literature review. J Prosthet Dent 2005 Oct;94(4):377-381.
  16. The three-dimension finite element analysis of stress in posterior tooth residual root restored with postcore crown. Dent Traumatol 2010 Feb;26(1):64-69.
  17. A mimic osseointegrated implant model for three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Oral Rehab 2003 Jan;30(1):41-45.
  18. Restoring endodontically treated teeth with posts and cores - a review. Quintessence Int 2005 Oct;36(9):737-746.
  19. ; Nelson, SJ. Wheeler's dental anatomy, physiology and occlusion. 8th ed. 2009, Saunders, an imprint of Elsevier, Missouri
  20. Newman, Henry H. Takei, Fermin A. Carranza's clinical periodontology. 9th ed. 2003, Saunders, an imprint of Elsevier, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
  21. ; Bakland, LK. Endodontics. 5th ed. 2005, division of Reed Elsevier India pvt Ltd, New Delhi, India.
  22. ; Sumiya, H.; Whitsett LD.; Jacobi, R.; Brackett, SE. Fundamentals of fixed prosthodontics. 3rd ed. 1997, Quintessence Publishing Co Ltd, Carol Stream, IL.
  23. The effect of post type and length on the fracture resistance of endodontically treated teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2009 Mar;101(3):174-182.
  24. Automatic finite element mesh generation for maxillary second pre- molar. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 1999 Jun;59(3):187-195.
  25. Functional occlusion: from TMJ to smile design.
  26. Evidence-based decision-making: implants versus natural teeth. Dent Clin North Am 2006 Jul;50(3):451-461, viii.
  27. Why do dental implants fail? Part II. Implant Dent 1999;8(3):265-277.
  28. Ret- rospective cross sectional comparison of initial nonsurgical endodontic treatment and single-tooth implants. J Endod 2006 Sep;32(9):822-827.
  29. The effect of thread pattern upon implant osseointegration. Clin Oral Implants Res 2010 Feb;21(2):129-136.
  30. Biologi- cal factors contributing to failures of osseointegrated oral implants. (I). Success criteria and epidemiology. Eur J Oral Sci 1998 Feb;106(1):527-551.
  31. Load transfer on dental implants and surrounding bones. Aust J Basic Appl Sci 2012;6(3):551-560.
  32. A study of bite force, part 1: relationship to various physical characteristics. Angle Orthod 1995;65(5): 367-372.
  33. Effect of dental implant micro thread dimensions on osteoblasts. Implantology. 4-11.
  34. Contemporary implant dentistry. 3rd ed. 2010, Mosby Inc, St. Louis, Missouri
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.