Archive/Biomechanical Evaluation of Different Posterior Mandibular Implant Configurations Under Bruxism: An FEA Study
Biomechanical Evaluation of Different Posterior Mandibular Implant Configurations Under Bruxism: An FEA Study
Mehmet Ates, Ceyda Akin
July 31, 2026
en

Abstract

This study evaluated the biomechanical performance of different abutment types, superstructure materials, prosthetic designs, and loading conditions in the implant-supported rehabilitation of three consecutive missing teeth in the mandibular posterior region using three-dimensional finite element analysis (3D-FEA). Twenty FEA models were constructed, simulating two-implant (pontic, mesial, and distal cantilever) and three-implant (splinted and unsplinted) configurations using multi-unit and Ti-base abutments composed of titanium alloy (Grade 5, Ti-6Al-4V), with monolithic zirconia and zirconia-supported feldspathic porcelain superstructures. Functional and parafunctional (bruxism) vertical and oblique loads were applied to analyze von Mises stresses in the components and principal stresses in the peri-implant bone. The results indicated that two-implant models generated higher stress concentrations than three-implant models, and unsplinted or cantilevered designs produced elevated stresses compared to splinted or pontic designs. Ti-base abutments resulted in greater stress accumulation in the connection complex compared to multi-unit systems. Under vertical and oblique parafunctional forces, stress values on the abutments in distal cantilever models—particularly in unsplinted Ti-base designs under oblique loading—exceeded the yield strength of the Ti-6Al-4V alloy (890 MPa), indicating a substantial risk of plastic deformation. To optimize biomechanical stability, three-implant-supported, splinted designs utilizing Multi-unit abutments should be prioritized. Avoiding distal cantilevers and unsplinted designs is critical in patients with bruxism to minimize the risk of mechanical failure in the Ti-6Al-4V components.

IPC Classification

A61C07A01B60

Keywords

biomechanicalevaluationdifferentposteriormandibularimplantconfigurationsbruxismjournalfunctionalbiomaterialsevaluatedperformanceabutmenttypessuperstructurematerialsprostheticdesignsloadingconditionsimplant-supportedrehabilitationthree
Reference this publication

€ 4.00