Biomechanical evaluation of 3D-printed porous lattice versus solid mandibular implants: an in vitro study

Segmental mandibular reconstruction is challenging. This in-vitro study compared the biomechanics of two 3D-printed porous Ti-6Al-4 V implants (Quad-diametral-cross, Hex-vase) versus a solid implant using a dual-material 3D-printed mandibular model and strain gauges. A 100 N static load was applied. Under eccentric loading, the solid implant generated extremely high tensile strain (871.67 µε), while porous designs reduced peak strains. The Hex-vase design transmitted the highest compressive strain (-795.85 µε), 65% greater in magnitude than the solid, suggesting improved mechanical stimulus transfer to peri-implant bone. The QDC design provided a moderate environment, suitable for compromised bone. Porous implants are biomechanically superior, offering customizable solutions to mitigate stress shielding.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2026-04-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-50741-6
Primary Topic
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Biomechanical evaluation of 3D-printed porous lattice versus solid mandibular implants: an in vitro study

Lih‐Jyh Fuh, Jui-Ting Hsu, Hao Zhang, Heng-Li Huang
Scientific Reports
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
article

Biomechanical evaluation of 3D-printed porous lattice versus solid mandibular implants: an in vitro study

Lih‐Jyh Fuh, Jui-Ting Hsu, Hao Zhang, Heng-Li Huang
article en

Abstract

Segmental mandibular reconstruction is challenging. This in-vitro study compared the biomechanics of two 3D-printed porous Ti-6Al-4 V implants (Quad-diametral-cross, Hex-vase) versus a solid implant using a dual-material 3D-printed mandibular model and strain gauges. A 100 N static load was applied. Under eccentric loading, the solid implant generated extremely high tensile strain (871.67 µε), while porous designs reduced peak strains. The Hex-vase design transmitted the highest compressive strain (-795.85 µε), 65% greater in magnitude than the solid, suggesting improved mechanical stimulus transfer to peri-implant bone. The QDC design provided a moderate environment, suitable for compromised bone. Porous implants are biomechanically superior, offering customizable solutions to mitigate stress shielding.

Scientific Reports
Asia University (TW), China Medical University (TW), China Medical University Hospital (TW)
National Science and Technology Council, China Medical University, China Medical University, Taiwan, National Science and Technology Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.