BIOMECHANICAL JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SELECTION OF DENTAL IMPLANT DESIGN BASED ON FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11603/2311-9624.2026.3.16637Keywords:
dental implantation, biomechanics, osseointegration, stress–strain state, bone tissue, dental implantsAbstract
Objective. To perform a comparative biomechanical evaluation of NeO and ATID dental implant designs using finite element analysis and to determine the implant design providing the most favorable distribution of functional loading in cortical and cancellous bone. Materials and methods. A three-dimensional finite element model of a mandibular segment was reconstructed from computed tomography data. Two AlphaBio (Israel) dental implant designs, NeO and ATID, were analyzed. Equivalent von Mises stress distribution in cortical and cancellous bone was evaluated under vertical and horizontal loading ranging from 60 to 420 N, including physiological masticatory loading of 300 N. Results. Under a vertical load of 300 N, the NeO implant demonstrated lower maximum equivalent stresses than the ATID implant. In cortical bone, the maximum stress reached 16.5 MPa, which was 29.2% lower than that observed for the ATID implant. In cancellous bone, the maximum stress decreased to 2.2 MPa, representing a 64.5% reduction compared with the ATID design. A linear relationship was observed between the applied load and the equivalent von Mises stress. The NeO implant exhibited a more uniform stress distribution and lower stress concentration within the periimplant bone. Conclusions. Finite element analysis is an effective method for the biomechanical evaluation of dental implant systems. The NeO implant design provides a more favorable stress distribution than the ATID design, creating improved conditions for primary stability and osseointegration. These findings support the clinical use of the NeO implant, particularly in patients with reduced bone mineral density.
References
1. Niwano Y., Shishido S., Shirato M., Kohzaki H., Nakamura K. Therapeutic Potential of Proanthocyanidins in Dentistry: A Focus on Periodontal Disease and on Dental Implants in Osteoporotic Patients. Antioxidants (Basel). 2025. Vol. 14 (7). Р. 850. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox14070850. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox14070850
2. Лучинський В. М., Лучинська Ю. І., Манащук Н. В., Лучинський М. А., Стойкевич Г. В. Вплив стану кісткової тканини на результати дентальної імплантації: клінічне дослідження. Український стоматологічний альманах. 2025. № 4. С. 103–108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31718/2409-0255.4.2025.14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31718/2409-0255.4.2025.14
3. Гуртова Я. М., Шнайдер С. А., Вальда В. В., Репужинський Й. М., Жук Д. Д., Мазур В. П. Оцінка показника антиоксидантного захисту у ротовій рідині пацієнтів з хронічним генералізованим пародонтитом, остеопенією та остеопорозом на тлі лікувально-профілактичного комплексу. Інновації в стоматології. 2025. № 3. С. 92–96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35220/2523-420X/2025.3.13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35220/2523-420X/2025.3.13
4. Ortiz R., Maurício P., Mascarenhas P.S. Densifying the Future: A Critical Review of Osseodensification and Implant Dentistry. Dentistry Journal. 2025. Vol. 13 (10). P. 461. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/dj13100461. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/dj13100461
5. Kim S. Y., Lee Y. J., Kang Y. J., Kim S. G., Rotaru H. Impact of Osteoporosis on Dental Implant Survival, Failure, and Marginal Bone Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Clin Med. 2025. Sep 23. Vol. 14 (19). P. 6719. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14196719. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14196719
6. Findler M., Doron H., Mann J., Chackartchi T., Tobias G. Clinical Success Rates of Dental Implants with Bone Grafting in a Large-Scale National Dataset. Journal of Functional Biomaterials. 2026. Vol. 17 (1). P. 46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb17010046. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jfb17010046
7. Jadhav L., Madiwal V., Rajwade J.M. The dental implant surface: a review of the past, present and future. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2026, Jan. 10. Vol. 37 (1). P. 21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-025-06997-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-025-06997-x
8. Qiu P., Cao R., Li Z., Fan Z. A comprehensive biomechanical evaluation of length and diameter of dental implants using finite element analyses: A systematic review. Heliyon. 2024. Vol. 10 (5). P. 26876. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26876. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26876
9. Park J., Park S., Kang I., Noh G. Biomechanical effects of bone quality and design features in dental implants in long-term bone stability. Journal of Computational Design and Engineering. 2022. Vol. 9 (5). P. 1538–1548. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jcde/qwac069. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jcde/qwac069
10. Kim E., Yoon Y., Kim J-E., Kwon Y-D. Influence of Morse Taper Angle and Bone Quality on the Biomechanical Behavior of Dental Implants: A Finite Element Analysis Study. Applied Sciences. 2025. Vol. 15. P. 12629. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app152312629. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app152312629
11. Insua A., Monje A., Wang H.-L, Miron R. J. Basis of bone metabolism around dental implants during osseointegration and peri-implant bone loss. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A. 2017. Vol. 105 (7). P. 2075–2089. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.36060. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jbm.a.36060
12. Duyck J., Vandamme K. The effect of loading on periimplant bone: A critical review of the literature. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. 2014. Vol. 41 (10). P. 783–794. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.12195. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.12195
13. Di Fiore A., Montagner M., Sivolella S. et al. Peri-Implant Bone Loss and Overload: A Systematic Review Focusing on Occlusal Analysis through Digital and Analogic Methods. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2022. Vol. 11 (16). P. 4812. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11164812. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11164812
14. Falcinelli C., Valente F., Vasta M., Traini T. Finite element analysis in implant dentistry: State of the art and future directions. Dental Materials. 2023. Vol. 39 (6). P. 539–556. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2023.04.002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2023.04.002
15. Aguirrebeitia J., Abasolo M., Vallejo J. et al. Influence of Bone Definition and Finite Element Parameters in Bone and Dental Implants Stress: A Literature Review. Biology (Basel). 2020. Vol. 9 (8). P. 224. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/biology9080224. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/biology9080224
