Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 20, 2025
Author Spotlight: Development of a Novel Finite Element Analysis Model for Improved Orthognathic Surgical Techniques
Published on: October 20, 2023
Different implant diameters and their effect on stress distribution pattern in 2-implant mandibular overdentures: A
Pravinkumar G Patil1, Liang Lin Seow2, Rashmi Uddanwadikar3
1Senior Lecturer in Prosthodontics, Division of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Statement Of Problem:
The edentulous mandible is commonly treated with a 2-implant overdenture. A change in diameter of the implants may affect the biomechanical behavior of the overdenture, but information on these effects is lacking.
Purpose:
The purpose of this 3D finite element analysis study was to evaluate the biomechanical behavior of 2-implant mandibular overdentures (2IMO) and their individual components by using implants of different diameters.
Material And Methods:
A 3D mandibular model was obtained from the cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of a 59-year-old edentulous man, and a 3D denture model was developed from intraoral scanning files in the Mimics software program. A 3D model of different diameters of implants (2.5 mm, 3.0 mm, 3.5 mm, and 4.0 mm) with a LOCATOR attachment was developed in the Solidworks software program. Two same-sized implants were inserted in the mandibular model at 10 mm from the midline in the 3Matics software program. A vertical load of 100 N was applied on the first molar region on the right side or both sides in the ANSYS software program. The maximum von Mises stresses and strains were recorded and analyzed.
Results:
Stresses within the implants decreased with an increase in diameter (from 2.5 mm to 3 mm, 3.5 mm, and 4.0 mm) of the implants. The highest stresses were observed with 2.5-mm-diameter implants (0.949 MPa under unilateral and 0.915 MPa under bilateral loading) and the lowest with Ø4-mm implants (0.710 MPa under unilateral and 0.703 MPa under bilateral loading). The strains on the implants ranged between 0.0000056 and 0.0000097, and those on the mandible ranged between 0.0000513 and 0.0000566 across all diameters of the implants without following a specific trend.
Conclusions:
In 2IMO, the stresses in the implants and mandible decreased with an increase in the diameter of the implants. The implants of lesser diameter (2.5 mm) exhibited the highest stresses and strains, and the implants of the largest diameter (4 mm) exhibited the lowest stresses and strains under unilateral and bilateral loading conditions.
