Peri-implant strain analysis: An in vitro comparison between screw- and cement-retained posterior base metal restorations

BACKGROUND: Research is required to characterize peri-implant strain distribution associated with different restorative designs. OBJECTIVES: This in vitro qualitative photoelastic stress analysis aimed to compare the influence of retention modality (screw-retained or cement-retained) on strain development around implants supporting different 3-unit posterior restorative designs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six prosthetic restorative designs were evaluated according to retention modality and prosthetic configuration: 3 single crowns, cement-retained and screw-retained (SC-c and SC-s, respectively); 3 splinted crowns (SP-c and SP-s); and simple 3-unit bridges (SB-c and SB-s). All prosthetic units were morphologically identical. A photoelastic resin block incorporating 3 implants was mounted on a loading device that applied vertical loads of 200 N simultaneously at 3 identical loading points on each restoration to simulate chewing, occlusal clenching and deglutition. Fringe lines were photographically recorded and qualitatively analyzed after placement of the restorations and during loading. RESULTS: Screw-retained restoration with splinted crowns (SP-s) was the only design to exhibit strain in the unloaded state following placement, representing preload strain. Loading-induced strains were observed in SC-c and SC-s, with lower strain levels for SC-c than for SC-s, and in SP-c and SP-s, with lower strain levels for SP-c than for SP-s. Both configurations also exhibited crestal strains. The simple bridge (SB) designs revealed purely axial strains, with no crestal strains, regardless of retention modality. CONCLUSIONS: Retention modality appears to influence peri-implant strain development in mesiodistal and occlusogingival dimensions for 3-unit single crown and splinted crown designs. Screw-retained 3-unit splinted prostheses may generate preload strains around the unloaded implant supporting the restoration. Simple 3-unit bridge designs demonstrated the most favorable strain pattern, regardless of the retention modality.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Dental and Medical Problems
Published
2026-08-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17219/dmp/204217
Primary Topic
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Peri-implant strain analysis: An in vitro comparison between screw- and cement-retained posterior base metal restorations

Gil Ben-Izhack, Oded Ghelfan, Sarit Naishlos, Ofir Rosner et al.
Dental and Medical Problems
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
article

Peri-implant strain analysis: An in vitro comparison between screw- and cement-retained posterior base metal restorations

Gil Ben-Izhack, Oded Ghelfan, Sarit Naishlos, Ofir Rosner, Joseph Nissan, Hagai Betzer, ariel levit
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Research is required to characterize peri-implant strain distribution associated with different restorative designs. OBJECTIVES: This in vitro qualitative photoelastic stress analysis aimed to compare the influence of retention modality (screw-retained or cement-retained) on strain development around implants supporting different 3-unit posterior restorative designs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Six prosthetic restorative designs were evaluated according to retention modality and prosthetic configuration: 3 single crowns, cement-retained and screw-retained (SC-c and SC-s, respectively); 3 splinted crowns (SP-c and SP-s); and simple 3-unit bridges (SB-c and SB-s). All prosthetic units were morphologically identical. A photoelastic resin block incorporating 3 implants was mounted on a loading device that applied vertical loads of 200 N simultaneously at 3 identical loading points on each restoration to simulate chewing, occlusal clenching and deglutition. Fringe lines were photographically recorded and qualitatively analyzed after placement of the restorations and during loading. RESULTS: Screw-retained restoration with splinted crowns (SP-s) was the only design to exhibit strain in the unloaded state following placement, representing preload strain. Loading-induced strains were observed in SC-c and SC-s, with lower strain levels for SC-c than for SC-s, and in SP-c and SP-s, with lower strain levels for SP-c than for SP-s. Both configurations also exhibited crestal strains. The simple bridge (SB) designs revealed purely axial strains, with no crestal strains, regardless of retention modality. CONCLUSIONS: Retention modality appears to influence peri-implant strain development in mesiodistal and occlusogingival dimensions for 3-unit single crown and splinted crown designs. Screw-retained 3-unit splinted prostheses may generate preload strains around the unloaded implant supporting the restoration. Simple 3-unit bridge designs demonstrated the most favorable strain pattern, regardless of the retention modality.

Dental and Medical ProblemsVol. 63(4)
Tel Aviv University (IL), Assuta Medical Center (IL)
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
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.