Journal of Dental Medicine

Background and Aims: Freestanding fixed partial prosthesis is considered the first choice whenever possible. However, anatomical limitations for implants and other reasons may create situation in which it would be preferable to connect the implants to teeth. A biomechanical dilemma in a tooth/implant-supported system comes from dissimilar mobility. This disparity cause the bridge to function as a cantilever and a series of potential problems such as osseointegration loss, screw loosening arise. The aim of this study was to analyze the tooth-implant supported bridges in rigid/non-rigid connectors in cemented prostheses using finite element stress analysis.

Materials and Methods: In this study four three-dimensional models were simulated by use of Solid works software. These models are: 1-RCCP: rigid connector between tooth and implant, 2-NRC CP1: non-rigid connector at mesial side of implant, 3-NRC CP2: non-rigid connector at distal side of second premolar, 4-NRC CP3: non-rigid connector at the middle of pontic, The stress values of four models loaded with vertical forces (150 N) were analyzed.

Results: The maximum stress concentration was located at the crestal bone around implant and stress distribution was more balanced around the teeth except in the model of NRCCP2. Stress distribution was imbalanced in non-rigid connection especially in the NRCCP1 model. The presence of non-rigid connector in bridge increases the stress values in suprastructure and transfers to the adjacent structures. Conclusion: The tooth-implant supported prosthesis should be considered as a valuable prosthetic option. It could be suggested that if tooth and implant abutments are to be used together as fixed prostheses supports, rigid connector is the choice because the prosthesis and implant possess the inherent flexibility to accommodate dissimilar mobility characteristics.