N. SELVAKUMAR, P. BALAMURUGAN: BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF AN OPTIMIZED PATIENT-SPECIFIC ...
509–518
BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF AN OPTIMIZED
PATIENT-SPECIFIC DENTAL-IMPLANT SCREW IN THE
POSTERIOR MANDIBLE
BIOMEHANSKA ANALIZA OPTIMIZACIJE PACIENTOVEGA
POSEBNEGA VIJAKA ZOBNEGA VSADKA V ZADNJEM DELU
^ELJUSTI
N. Selvakumar, P. Balamurugan
*
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mepco Schlenk Engineering College, Sivakasi – 626005, India
Prejem rokopisa – received: 2023-06-10; sprejem za objavo – accepted for publication: 2023-08-05
doi:10.17222/mit.2023.907
Implant design developed considerably with the advancement of restorative dentistry. Examining the stress distribution in the
cancellous and cortical bones around custom-made implants with different thread-profile models is the study’s objective. The
newly designed implants were made with a diameter and length of 4.5 mm and 11.5 mm. The implants were designed the same,
but had different thread profiles. Model A is designed with a standard V-shape thread design, and it was compared with the re-
maining three dental implants (models B, C, and D) having different customized thread-profile designs. The biomechanical
characteristics of the four implant models were compared with the use of biomechanical profiling to predict the mechanical per-
formance of various dental-screw models, including the influence of physiological factors. The stress distribution in the D4 bone
area of implants with different thread-profile designs under a vertical load of 100 N at 0° and an oblique load of 223.6 N at 25°
was examined using ANSYS Workbench. The trabecular and cortical bones comprise the structure of the D4 bone area. Defor-
mation and stress (von Mises) findings were found for the dental implants and bone. While implant models C and D showed less
stress distribution in the cortical and cancellous bone, they nonetheless produced outcomes superior to those of the conventional
model A underloading. According to the findings, the unique dental implant design lessens the stress concentration in the corti-
cal bone’s neck area. The suggested model C increases the implant’s stability in that region by distributing a low stress over the
D4 bone.
Keywords: FEA, cortical bone, trabecular bone, dental implants, thread profiles, stress distribution
Povzetek: razvoj oblikovanja zobnih vsadkov je mo~no napredoval z novim modernim pristopom k obnovitvenemu
zobozdravstvu. Cilj avtorjev pri~ujo~e {tudije je bilo ugotavljanje porazdelitve napetosti v poroznih in kortikalnih delih kosti
(~eljusti) okoli doma izdelanih zobnih vsadkov, ki so imeli razli~ne oblike profilov navojev. Na novo oblikovani vsadki so imeli
premer 4,5 mm in vi{ino 11,5 mm ter razli~en profil navoja. Avtorji raziskave so vsadek A s standardno V obliko navoja
primerjali s tremi razli~nimi zobnimi vsadki (z oblikami B, C in D), ki so imeli novo doma razvito obliko navojev. Biomehanske
karakteristike vseh {tirih izbranih oblik navojev so med seboj primerjali s pomo~jo biomehanskega profiliranja za napoved
mehanskih lastnosti vklju~no z u~inkom fiziolo{kih faktorjev. Porazdelitev napetosti so simulirali s programskim orodjem na
osnovi kon~nih elelmentov ANSYS Workbench v podro~ju kosti (delu ~eljusti) D4 in zobnih vsadkov z razli~nim profilom
navoja pod vertikalno obremenitvijo 100 N pri 0° in obremenitvijo 223,6 N pod kotom 25°. Struktura preseka dela kosti D4 je
vsebovala trabekularni (porozni) in kortikalni (povr{inski) del ~eljusti. Avtorji so s pomo~jo numeri~nih simulacij dolo~ili
deformacije in von Misesove napetosti v zobnih vsadkih in v kosti. Obliki navojev zobnih vsadkov C in D sta pokazali manj{o
porazdelitev napetosti v kortikalnem in trabekularnem delu kosti in ni~ slab{e lastnosti od vsadka s konvencionalno obliko
navoja A. V skladu s temi ugotovitvami avtorji ugotavljajo, da so razvili edinstven dizajn zobnih vsadkov z manj{o
koncentracijo napetosti v kortikalnem presku kostnega vratu. Predlagana oblika navoja C pove~uje stabilnost zobnega vsadka v
tem podro~ju s porazdelitvijo ni`jih obremenitev preko kosti oziroma izbranega dela ~eljusti D4.
Klju~ne besede: numeri~na simulacija in analiza na osnovi kon~nih elementov, kortikalna kost, trabekularna kost, zobni vsadki,
profili navoja, porazdelitev napetosti.
1 INTRODUCTION
An artificial tooth root, or a dental implant, is a medi-
cal device surgically inserted into the jaw to restore a
person’s ability to chew and, in certain situations, for
cosmetic purposes. The availability of dental implants
with incredible long-term results has transformed den-
tal-implant procedures. Ensuring a dental implant’s de-
sign can endure a range of loading scenarios and safely
transfer biting forces to the surrounding region is crucial
to the implant’s long-term success.
1
Dental implants are
surgically inserted into the jawbone to replace the lost
teeth. Only after the implants have been inserted into the
bone does osseointegration occur due to contact between
the implant’s surface and the bone around it. Osteo-
integration is the authentic and systemic connection be-
tween the surface of an implant exposed to a functional
load and the dwelling and structured bone. Numerous re-
quirements must be satisfied to accomplish osseo-
integration, such as biocompatible materials, acceptable
macro designs, sufficient surfaces, appropriate recon-
structive surgery, appropriate implant loading, etc.
Cone-Beam Computer Tomography (CBCT), which has
replaced time-consuming, expensive, and radiation-in-
Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 57 (2023) 5, 509–518 509
UDK 616.314:621.643.414 ISSN 1580-2949
Original scientific article/Izvirni znanstveni ~lanek MTAEC9, 57(5)509(2023)
*Corresponding author's e-mail:
mechbala2009@gmail.com (P. Balamurugan)

tensive medical CT scans, was first used in dentistry a
few decades ago. Compared to Multi-Slice Computer To-
mography (MSCT), CBCT is less expensive, simpler to
acquire, and has fewer metal distortions. Using the
Houndsfield Unit Scale (HU), it is regarded as a practical
method for determining bone density. Because dental im-
plants expose specific parts of the oral cavity and
maxillofacial region to radiation, CBCT is an excellent
option. By measuring the distance between the alveolar
crest and the mandibular canal to prevent impingement
of the inferior alveolar nerve, avoiding perforation of the
mandibular posterior lingual undercut, assessing bone
density and quality, and assisting in the planning of the
oral implant in the maxilla with particular attention to
the nasopalatine canal and the maxillary sinus, CBCT
scans help with the planning of an implant’s placement.
Osseointegration will be conditioned by biomechan-
ical stimuli that directly influence bone-implant contact.
The locations of the implant where it meets the sur-
rounding bone are where the load is distributed. Since
osseointegration depends on sufficient mechanical stabil-
ity and a favourable biological environment, dental im-
plants are designed with two main objectives: to favor
proper primary stabilization and to encourage appropri-
ate load transfer to the tissues surrounding the implant
once secondary or biological stability is attained after
osseointegration is achieved.
2
The osseointegration will
be conditioned by biomechanical stimuli that directly af-
fect the interface between the implant and the bone. The
implant’s contact points with the external bone will be
capable of dispersing load.
3
The design of dental im-
plants has a couple of goals: to support appropriate pri-
mary stabilization and to actively support the proper
transition of loads to the tissue surrounding the implant
once ancillary or physiological consistency has already
been attained after osseointegration. This is because
osseointegration depends on achieving sufficient me-
chanical stability and a favorable biological environment.
The implant’s morphological characteristics, the
body or core, the threads’ form and depth, and the
thread’s pitch are all aspects of the prosthesis’ macro-de-
sign. Both the tension that is transferred to the bone sup-
porting the prosthesis and the development of stresses
and strains at various levels of the implant are influenced
by the shape and geometry of any one of these compo-
nents.
4
The prosthetic design elements of tapered denture
bodies and triangular compression threads increase the
main stability. Achieving optimal primary-implant stabil-
ity requires consideration of the implant macro-design.
As soon as the implants are in place, forces must be
transmitted, and the prosthesis must propagate stresses
and strains on its own in order to employ immediate
loading techniques. In Table 1, several studies have ana-
lysed how the macro-design of prostheses and the many
variables that affect it affect the primary stability of im-
plants and osseointegration as a result.
5
However, dental
implants might fail due to insufficient stress distribution.
Another crucial element that affects dental implants’ suc-
cess is the stress distribution pattern.
6
The characteristics
of the bone supporting the augmentations are a critical
factor in primary stability. At the level of the bone where
the implants will be placed, there are two forms of bone:
cancellous or medullary bone and cortical bone. The
macro-design of the implant, the characteristics of the
bone that it resides in, the stresses on the implant, and
how those loads are distributed will determine the pri-
mary stability. The thread-profile designs must be care-
fully researched and improved to get the optimum out-
comes since they are the most significant factor
influencing the stress distribution in the surrounding
bone region.
7
Table 1: Determinants of early and late implant failure
8
Early Failure Late Failure
Micromovement (lack of primary
stability)
Short implants
Early/immediate loading
Narrow implants
Low-density bone (osteoporosis)
Bacterial infection
One-piece vs
two-piece
Smoking
Neck of the implant
History of
periodontitis
Surgical trauma
Overheating
Compression osteonecrosis
Infection
Excessive Load
Trauma
Inadequate restoration
Short/narrow im-
plants
Impaired healing
Diabetes
Age
Smoking
In advance to actual practice, dental implants that use
the software can be digitally developed and examined.
Potential flaws can be found utilizing the software tools,
and any issues can be resolved for a higher success rate
in the clinical scenario. The implant surface’s noticeably
higher taper enables more advantageous implant place-
ment and improved implant stability, simplifying the sur-
gical procedure. Clinical evaluation of the load distribu-
tion on the implants and bone brought on by the force
applied to dental implants is challenging. Therefore,
computational methods like Finite-Element Analysis can
assess the loading of dental implants and the underlying
bone. FEA has been routinely utilized to forecast the me-
chanical performance of various dental-implant designs
and determine the implant’s success.
9
Metals can be used for dental implants because of
their biomechanical characteristics. In addition to these
qualities, metals are also simple to work with and have a
nice finish. Implants made of metal can also be sterilised
using a standard sterilisation method. But as technology
has advanced, older metals like cobalt-chromium and
stainless steel have become outdated and have been re-
placed. In recent years, titanium and its alloys, particu-
larly Ti-6Al-4V , have emerged as the metals of choice
for dental implants.
10
Titanium has an exemplary proven
record of performance when utilized as an implant mate-
rial, and its biocompatibility is to thank for this success
N. SELV AKUMAR, P. BALAMURUGAN: BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF AN OPTIMIZED PATIENT-SPECIFIC ...
510 Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 57 (2023) 5, 509–518

with titanium implants. However, titanium has an aes-
thetic problem because of its grey tone. This problem is
more apparent when the soft tissue condition is not ideal,
and the implant’s dark tint is seen through the thin mu-
cosa.
11
There are three different types of titanium alloys:
alpha, beta, and . The additional substances function
as phase condition stabilizers when pure titanium is
heated with Al, Va under certain circumstances and then
cooled. Aluminium enhances the strength and stabilizes
the alpha-phase conditions. As a stabilizer of the beta
phase, we have vanadium. The alpha-beta variant is pres-
ent in the majority of alloys. The most popular implant
h a s6%A la n d4%V .
12
The maximum stress values in the surrounding bone
area must be minimized throughout the design phase to
maximize the implant’s stability. In this investigation, the
implant is loaded vertically and obliquely to measure the
stress distribution in the area of the bone around it. This
FEA investigation’s primary objective is to investigate
how different implant designs affect the stress-strain dis-
tribution to the dental implant and the supporting bone.
2 MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1 Computer-Aided Design (CAD) Modelling
The CBCT scan obtained from a patient aged 53, de-
picted the need for a dental implant of length 11.5mm
and diameter 4.5mm (Figure 1).
Four unique implant types were developed, each with
a similar diameter (4.5 mm) and length (11.5 mm), and
they all have the same surface and material characteris-
tics. Comparable to the other three implant models,
Model A of the four implants shares a common thread.
A typical implant featuring a cylindrical body and
"V"-shaped threads. (Model A, Figure a).
A proposed implant model B with a ridge-shaped
thread design and a cavity between the threads (Model
B, Figure b).
A proposed implant model C with a ridge-shaped
thread design (Model C, Figure c).
A proposed implant model D with a cavity between
the threads (Model D, Figure d).
N. SELV AKUMAR, P. BALAMURUGAN: BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF AN OPTIMIZED PATIENT-SPECIFIC ...
Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 57 (2023) 5, 509–518 511
Figure 1: CBCT scan of a patient with a missing tooth in D4 bone
Figure 2: Thread-profile design of implant model for D4 bone: A)
Solid model, B) Cross-sectional model
Table 2: Standard dimension of dental implant features
S. No. Feature Dimensions, mm
1. Platform diameter 3.5
2. Bevel diameter 4.5
3. Implant height 11.5
4. Pitch 0.8
5. Abutment post height 5.5
6. Abutment cuff height 2
7. Implant screw thread
1.8 × 0.35
(Diameter × Pitch)
8. Fixture internal hex 2.3

The other implant variants have different thread-pro-
file designs than the conventional implant, which has a
typical V-shaped thread design. The same standard di-
mension is used to create all four dental implants. Ta-
ble 2 includes a list of the dental implant sizes.
The 3D computer-aided design models were made
with Autodesk Fusion 360. These geometries were input
using ANSYS Workbench 2021 R2, a finite-element
analysis tool, to create meshes and perform the finite-ele-
ment analysis. A bone block model made of a cancellous
bone core, also known as a trabecular bone core, encir-
cled by 1-mm cortical bone was produced based on a
cross-sectional scan of the mandibular area that mea-
sured 17 mm in height and 12 mm in breadth.
13
The bone
model, shown in Figure 3, describes the cortical and
cancellous bones.
2.2 Material Properties
All the materials are homogeneous, linearly elastic,
and isotropic. Bone from the cortical and cancellous re-
gions and titanium alloy (Ti-6Al-4V) are the materials
employed in the finite-element analysis model. Table 3
provides the material parameters used in the FE model,
which are obtained from the literature and include the
density, Poisson’s ratio, and modulus of elasticity.
14
Table 3: Mechanical properties of bone and implant
S.No. Particulars
Youngs
Modulus,
GPa
Poisson
Ratio
Density,
kg/m
3
1. Cortical Bone 14.7 0.30 1850
2. Cancellous Bone 1.470 0.30 900
3.
Titanium alloy
(Ti-6Al-4V)
110 0.35 4500
2.3 Finite-Element Analysis
To simplify the model, one or more characteristics
are ignored in the current investigation. The simplifica-
tions do not impact the final analysis results. The inter-
face between the bone and implant was expected to sim-
ulate osseointegration completely. As a result, a "fixed
connection" scenario is created between implant-cortical
bone and implant-cancellous bone. The same "fixed
bond" is also established between the cortical and
cancellous bones.
15
The FEA model of standard implant model A con-
sists of 51,136 nodes and 28,640 elements, implant
model B consists of 1,07,497 nodes and 62,014 ele-
ments, and model C consists of 57,734 nodes and 32,577
elements. The FEA model of implant model D consists
of 76,009 nodes and 43,033 elements. The implant
model’s boundary conditions were entirely limited in all
directions, preventing the cortical or cancellous bone
from moving in any direction.
16,17
2.4. Loading Conditions
Axial or non-axial loading is possible. An axial force
is applied downward to the implant’s long axis. The ten-
sile stress is transmitted by non-axial pressures or hori-
zontal loading forces and attempts to separate the com-
ponents by inducing a destructive bending movement.
Mixed loading–a combination of axial and non-axial
loads–simulates real-world situations where the actual
force exerted can be angled relative to the implant axis.
These oblique pressures have a higher degree of clinical
realism. All four dental implant types had their long axes
exposed to static vertical loads of 100 N at 0° and an
oblique load of 223.6 N at 25° (composed of a vertical
force of 100 N and a horizontal force of 200 N). The
mesh size was programmed to adapt to the specific char-
acteristics of the implant models automatically.
18
2.4.1 FEA Data Collection
The stress distribution is obtained by setting the von
Mises stress (equivalent stress) as the output variable in
the ANSYS Workbench 2021 R2. The maximum stress
values on the cortical bone and the stress distribution at
the cancellous bone were determined using the von
Mises stresses.
19
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The conventional model A and additional suggested
models B, C, and D all have maximum values for the
stress distribution (von Mises) reported in Table 4. The
suggested implant type A, B, C, and D’s stress distribu-
tion in the cortical bone (bone 1) and cancellous bone
(bone 2) is shown in Figures 4 and 5. In all FEA models,
the maximum stresses were found in the cortical bone
surrounding the implant and in the implant neck area un-
N. SELV AKUMAR, P. BALAMURUGAN: BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF AN OPTIMIZED PATIENT-SPECIFIC ...
512 Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 57 (2023) 5, 509–518
Figure 3: The implant, cortical bone, and cancellous bone are in-
cluded

N. SELV AKUMAR, P. BALAMURUGAN: BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF AN OPTIMIZED PATIENT-SPECIFIC ...
Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 57 (2023) 5, 509–518 513
Figure 4: FEA of stress distribution under 100 N vertical load of dental models

der 100 N at 0° and an oblique loading of 223.6 N at an
angle of 25°.
The highest von Mises stress in the cortical bone for
model A under a loading of 100 N at 0° was
47.439 MPa, whereas the stresses in the cortical bones
for models B, C, and D were 39.555 MPa, 37.698 MPa,
and 38.272 MPa, respectively. Model A showed a maxi-
mum von Mises stress of 47.439 MPa in the cortical
bone with a loading of 223.6N at 25°, whereas Model B,
Model C, and Model D had stresses of 39.555 MPa,
37.698 MPa, and 38.272 MPa, respectively.
The maximum von Mises stress in the cancellous
bone for model A under loading of 100 N at 0° was
4.1731 MPa, while the maximum von Mises stress in the
cancellous bone for models B, C, and D was
3.1148 MPa, 2.8037 MPa, and 2.4438 MPa, respectively.
Model A had a maximum von Mises stress in the
cancellous bone of 6.3885 MPa under loading 223.6N at
25°. In contrast, model B had a maximum von Mises
stress in the cancellous bone of 5.6167 MPa, model C
had a maximum von Mises stress in the cancellous bone
of 4.8639 MPa, and model D had a maximum von Mises
stress in the cortical bone of 3.895 MPa.
When compared to the stress distribution in the corti-
cal and cancellous bones of Model A, B, and C, respec-
tively, Model C and Model D had the lowest stress distri-
bution.
Table 4: Stress distribution in proposed models
Mo-
dels
Component
Equivalent (Von
Mises) stress
(MPa) 100 N, 0°
Angle
Equivalent (Von
Mises) stress
(MPa) 223.6 N,
25° Angle
Static
Loading
Dynamic
Loading
Static
Loading
Dynamic
Loading
Model
A
Cortical Bone 47.439 49.531 80.199 81.856
Cancellous Bone 4.1731 5.923 6.3885 6.514
Model
B
Cortical Bone 36.555 41.321 65.149 67.025
Cancellous Bone 3.114 5.181 5.616 5.826
Model
C
Cortical Bone 37.698 39.723 59.739 61.786
Cancellous Bone 2.803 3.018 4.863 4.996
Model
D
Cortical Bone 38.272 41.025 60.542 61.778
Cancellous Bone 2.443 3.987 3.895 4.096
Various design components, including fixture form,
thread shape, pitch, screw type, and fixture connection
type, are used to create dental implants. The literature
has extensively covered the design aspect.
20,21
However,
the results cannot be applied when several changes are
made to the thread profile design. In implant dentistry,
FEA is utilized to examine and predict variations
brought on by modifications to thread profile design. To
evaluate the mechanical behavior of dental implant mod-
els with the same diameter and length in response to
variations in thread profile design, this work employed a
FEA.
22
According to the results of this investigation, the
implant neck was the area under the most stress. The dis-
tribution of stress in the implant’s neck area must thus be
considered more when designing dental implants. Some
studies suggest that altering the thread-profile design
may impact on the stress level on the peri-implant corti-
cal bone, avoiding the loss of that bone.
23
The crestal bone near an implant in an oblique con-
tact angle with the crestal bone to the implant neck rather
than a perpendicular angle with the implant neck exhibits
lower peak stresses.
24
Stress is distributed more evenly
by the divergent implant collar than by the straight
form.
25
To resolve the disputed question of whether im-
plant geometry is optimal for preserving crestal bone and
has a lesser stress distribution, new implant models were
designed and analyzed in this work. The tapering root
analogue morphology of the new implant body mimics
the form of natural roots. Because a tapered implant
body minimizes the cortical and trabecular bone stress, it
is a characteristic of all the implant designs. According
to earlier research, the fixture’s tapering body design
may reduce the peak stress in both the trabecular and
cortical bone.
26
Using three-dimensional finite-element
analysis techniques, a stress analysis of various implants
was performed.
27
When compared to three cylindrical
implants with and without a "V" thread, two stepped im-
plants with and without a "V" thread, and a tapered body
implant with thread, the authors discovered that the ta-
pered body implant with thread showed a 32 percent de-
crease in stress in the cortical bone and a 17 percent de-
crease in stress in the trabecular bone. Additionally
investigated was the effect of implant body profile design
on stress distribution.
28
The authors claim that lowering the implant taper re-
sults in tension in the bone around the implant’s neck
area, while increasing implant taper generates stress in
the bone surrounding the implant’s body. Using a
three-dimensional FEA, it was determined how different
implant thread-profile designs affected how much stress
was placed on the nearby bones.
29
The researchers used
four implant designs with the same diameter and length.
In terms of stress distribution in the nearby bone area, ta-
pered implants had the most advantageous stress design
when compared to cylindrical implants. A study also
showed the effect of implant design on stress distribution
in the cortical and trabecular bone.
29
In particular, in
low-density bone, the authors hypothesised that tapered
implants would perform better than cylindrical implants.
Additional studies have investigated the impact of pri-
mary implant stability on implant profile design.
30
The
implant will be more stable and simpler if the implant
body and thread profile are tapered, simplifying the sur-
gical procedure.
31
In some therapeutic situations, when greater implant
durability is needed, tapered implants offer some bene-
fits. These circumstances include immediate loading pro-
cedures, post-extraction implants, and implant implanta-
tion in low-density bone.
32
In examining the suggested
design models on the cortical and trabecular bone, im-
plant models C and D indicated lower stress in the sur-
N. SELV AKUMAR, P. BALAMURUGAN: BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF AN OPTIMIZED PATIENT-SPECIFIC ...
514 Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 57 (2023) 5, 509–518

N. SELV AKUMAR, P. BALAMURUGAN: BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF AN OPTIMIZED PATIENT-SPECIFIC ...
Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 57 (2023) 5, 509–518 515
Figure 5: FEA of stress distribution under 223.6 N oblique load at an angle of 25° of dental models

rounding bone region. The stress reduction in models C
and D might be attributed to the biomechanical impact of
the thread-profile design with an improved interfacial
area for bone-implant contact. According to in-vitro and
in-vivo research, micro-threads in dental implants’ pro-
file designs may positively impact on how the stress is
distributed in the cortical and trabecular bone.
33
FEA is
used to examine the impact of micro-threads on the
stress distribution implant in the peri-implant bone. Re-
searchers evaluated 17 implants with and without mi-
cro-threads on the thread profile design, and they discov-
ered that the latter had reduced marginal bone loss after
three years of functional loading. Thread geometry is an-
other critical factor affecting dental implant stability.
34
Based on the thread arrangement, including shape
and size, stresses in the bone-implant region have been
reported.
35
The first implant to be presented was the
"V"-shaped implant. Because it offers a superior initial
mechanical interlock, a "V"-shaped design is frequently
used in mechanical engineering to increase the stability
of metal parts when they are brought together. Thanks to
excellent knowledge of stress patterns, several thread ge-
ometry-related concepts have been investigated. Buttress
threads combine the advantages of both "V"-shaped and
rectangular thread designs, transferring force more
equally than "V"-shaped threads.
36
Shear stress is the pri-
mary harmful force during bone-implant contact. Im-
plant threads should provide for increased stability and
implant surface to lessen the number of adverse stresses.
A photo elastic stress analysis technique was used to re-
cord the force on the bone-implant interface, and it was
connected to the thread’s facial angle. It has been dem-
onstrated that reverse buttress and rectangular threads
produce less shear stress than V-shaped threads. Addi-
tionally, V-shaped buttress threads can exert stresses that
could form flaws.
37
Conversely, V-shaped thread profiles and reverse but-
tress threads transmit force via tensile, compressive, and
shear stresses. Buttress and rectangular thread implanta-
tion primarily distribute axial loads by compressive
strength.
38
According to results from FEA research con-
nected to bone-implant contact, published in a literature
review, the rectangular thread offers the best surface area
for transmitting compressive stress. The results show that
rectangular-shaped threads transfer less compressive and
cutting-type stresses to the surrounding tissues than
V-shaped profiles and reverse-angled-shaped threads.
The rectangular thread implants exhibited the highest
torque when the removal values of osseointegrated im-
plants with V-shaped, rectangular, and reverse-angled
threads were evaluated.
39
In the current study, the stress
distribution in the cortical and cancellous bone of im-
plant models B, C, and D was compared to the typical
implant model A. The cortical and trabecular bone is less
stressed by implant models C with a ridge-shaped thread
profile and implant model D with a hollow than by im-
plant model A with a V-shaped thread.
40
The thread pro-
file shape in implants C and D can increase the stress
distribution in the nearby bone area due to the aforemen-
tioned considerations. One factor that causes bone loss
surrounding a dental implant is unfavorable stress distri-
bution. Other factors include surgical trauma, implant-
abutment micro-gaps, and bacterial infiltration. Marginal
bone loss has been connected to surface characterization
and implant thread profile design.
41
The primary objective of the ongoing FEA studies is
to look at the load-dependent biomechanical conditions
in the tissues around implants. The geometry of the im-
plant-bone contact at the crest level characterizes the
zones of concentrated stress. According to the research,
implant model C in the current study had a lower maxi-
mum equivalent stress in the cortical bone. The cortical
bone experiences stress of 37.698 MPa and 38.272 MPa
when 100 N of force is applied vertically along the verti-
cal axis of the implant, respectively. These stresses are
lower than those experienced by implants A and B,
which share 47.439 MPa and 80.1999 MPa, respectively.
The stress in the cortical bone is 59.739 MPa and
60.524 MPa, respectively, when 223.6N force is applied
at an angle of 25° to the implant’s axis. This stress is
lower than that of another implant, which has values of
80.1999 MPa and 65.149 MPa. Implant models C and D
also show reduced stress in the cancellous bone than im-
plant models A and B. It is challenging to compare the
findings of this investigation to those of previous studies
since, as far as the authors are aware, no FEA data on the
approximate threshold value at which marginal bone re-
sorption may occur has been reported in the literature.
We were able to demonstrate, however, that models C
and D are preferable to models A (standard) and B in
terms of decreasing the stress in the peri-implant cortical
bone region since the stress is lower in equivalent lengths
and diameters, based on the data acquired in this study.
Some issues with the present FEA research prevent it
from correctly simulating clinical trials.
First, the force that the tongue exerts while chewing
and the impact of different loading circumstances cannot
be considered by FEA. Second, despite this not often be-
ing the case in practice, the jawbone was meant to be
isotropic and homogenous, with a bonded contact be-
tween the implant and cortical/cancellous bone and be-
tween the cortical and cancellous bone. Third, occlusal
pressures were delivered to the implant rather than the
crown under clinical circumstances. The current study
cannot provide absolute and effective stress compared to
a genuine model, even though such simplifications are
allowed in the experimental test. The results revealed
must thus be compared to those acquired from in-vivo
studies.
4 CONCLUSIONS
In the current investigation, the link between the
loading force and stress on the bone surrounding four
N. SELV AKUMAR, P. BALAMURUGAN: BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF AN OPTIMIZED PATIENT-SPECIFIC ...
516 Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 57 (2023) 5, 509–518

dental implant models with identical diameter and length
(4.5 × 11.5 mm) and various thread-profile designs was
examined. We could draw the conclusion that implant
design appears to have an impact on how strain and
stress are distributed in bone and implants based on the
results of this FEA study and within its limitations. Ac-
cording on the results of the FEA analysis,
• Compared to the traditional model’s A, B, and D, the
novel implant model C showed reduced maximum
von Mises stresses in the peri-implant cortical bone
area.
• The implant model C showed a reduced stress con-
centration in the compact bone region, which was
transferred to the cancellous bone region during axial
and oblique load.
• The implant model C also showed a strain in the cor-
tical bone region and lower stress concentration in
the cancellous bone than the model’s A, B, and D.
• In any situation, the load distribution may be accept-
able, given the resistance of the nearby bone.
Within the limitations of the current experiment, it is
conceivable to conclude that the novel implant design 'C'
can contribute to a proper stress distribution on the sur-
rounding bone, which impacts the implant’s long-term
endurance. An upcoming investigation ought to attempt
to correlate results with clinical findings. In doing so, it
enhances the validity of the models. In addition, simulate
the consequence of saliva, infection and fatigue failure
under repetitive, realistic, and cyclic loading conditions
must be evaluated.
Acknowledgment
The author(s) would like to thank Mepco Schlenk
Engineering College, Sivakasi and Madurai Kamaraj
University, Madurai for providing the excellent facilities
and constant support extended to carry out the research
work. The authors express their sincere gratitude to Dr.
Deenadayalan, MDS, Madurai Multi Speciality Dental
Clinic, Madurai for his consistent guidance in this re-
search paper.
5 REFERENCES
1
B. A. Gultekin, P. Gultekin, S. Yalcin, Application of finite element
analysis in implant dentistry, 2017, 22–54
2
H. Abuhussein, G. Pagni, A. Rebaudi, H. Wang, The effect of thread
pattern upon implant osseointegration, Clin Oral Implants Res., 21
(2020) 2, 129–36
3
L. Hyeonjong, P. Soyeon, N. Gunwoo, Biomechanical analysis of 4
types of short dental implants in a resorbed mandible, The Journal of
Prosthetic Dentistry, 121 (2019) 4, 659– 670
4
W. Nicholson, Titanium Alloys for Dental Implants: A Review, Pros-
thesis, 2 (2020) 2, 100–116, doi:10.3390/prosthesis202001
5
N. Sykaras, A. M. Iacopino, V. A. Marker, R. G. Triplett, R. D.
Woody, Implant materials, designs, and surface topographies: their
effect on osseointegration. A literature review, International Journal
Oral Maxillofac Implants, 15 (2018) 5, 675–90
6
R. S. Desai, R. Singh, I. Karthikeyan, G. Reetika, Jyothilaxmi,
Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis of Effect of Prosthetic
Materials and Short Implant Biomechanics on D4 Bone under Imme-
diate Loading, Journal of Dental Implants, 2 (2012), 1,
doi:10.4103/0974-6781.96556
7
L. Paracchini, C. Barbieri, M. Redaelli, D. D. Croce, C. Vincenzi, R.
Guarnieri, Finite Element Analysis of a New Dental Implant Design
Optimized for the Desirable Stress Distribution in the Surrounding
Bone Region, Prosthesis, 2 (2020) 3, 225–236
8
M. Geramizadeh, H. Katoozian, R. Amid, M. Kadkhodazadeh, Finite
Element Analysis of Dental Implants with and without Microthreads
under Static and Dynamic Loading, Journal of Long-Term Effects of
Medical Implants, 27 (2017) 1, 25–35
9
P. Balamurugan, N. Selvakumar, Development of patient specific
dental implant using 3D printing”, Journal of Ambient Intelligence
and Humanized Computing, 12 (2021) 3, 3549–3558
10
P. Ma, W. Xiong,T. Baosheng,G. Wei, L. Jiaqiang, L. Weihong, L.
Dehua, Influence of Thread Pitch, Helix Angle, and Compactness on
Micromotion of Immediately Loaded Implants in Three Types of
Bone Quality: A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis,
BioMed Research International, 113 (2016) 2, 113–126,
doi:10.1155/2014/983103
11
Y . Chang, A. A. Tambe, Y . Maeda, M. Wada, T. Gonda, Finite ele-
ment analysis of dental implants with validation: to what extent can
we expect the model to predict biological phenomena? A literature
review and proposal for classification of a validation process, Int J
Implant Dent., 4 (2018) 1, 1–7, doi:10.1186/s40729-018-0119-5
12
F. S. A HosseiniFaradonbeh, H. R. Katoozian, Biomechanical evalu-
ations of the long-term stability of dental implant using finite ele-
ment modeling method: a systematic review, J Adv Prosthodont, 14
(2022) 3, 182–202, doi:10.4047/jap.2022.14.3.182
13
R. C. Van Staden, H. Guan, Y . C. Loo, Application of the finite ele-
ment method in dental implant research, Computer Methods in
Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, 9 (2016) 4, 257–270,
doi:10.1080/10255840600837074
14
P. Oyar, R. Durkan, G. Deste, The effect of the design of a mandibu-
lar implant-supported zirconia prosthesis on stress distribution, The
Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 125 (2021) 3, 27–52, doi:10.1016/
j.prosdent.2020.05.027
15
L. Ting, M. Zhixiang, Y. Ti, W. Chao, H. Yuanding Huang, Bio-
mechanical comparison of implant inclinations and load times with
the all-on-4 treatment concept: a three-dimensional finite element
analysis, Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engi-
neering, 22 (2019) 6, 585–594, doi:10.1080/10255842.2019.1572120
16
M. Yalcin, B. Kaya, N. Lacin, E. Ari, Three-Dimensional Finite Ele-
ment Analysis of the Effect of Endosteal Implants with Different
Macro Designs on Stress Distribution in Different Bone Qualities,
Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implant, 34 (2019), 43–50
17
V . E Batista, J. F. S Junior, D. A. Almeida, L. F. Lopes, F. R. Verri, E.
P. Pellizzer, The effect of offset implant configuration on bone stress
distribution: A systematic review. J. Prosthodont, 24 (2016), 93–99
18
J. Maminskas, A. Puisys, R. Kuoppala, A. Raustia, G. Juodzbalys,
The Prosthetic Influence and Biomechanics on Peri-Implant Strain:
A Systematic Literature Review of Finite Element Studies, J. Oral
Maxillofac. Res., (2016), 7–14
19
E. C. Sivrikaya, M. M. Omezli, Effect of Tapered and Cylindrical
Implants on Stress Distribution in Different Bone Qualities: Finite
Element Analysis, Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implant, 34 (2019),
99–105
20
G. H. Do, S. J. Lee, J. M. Kim, S. M. Kim, Study on the Fatigue Test
and the Accelerated Life Test for Dental Implant using Univer-
sal-Joint Test Type, J. Appl. Reliab., 17 (2017), 50–57
21
E. Kitamura, R. Stegaroiu, S. Nomura, O. Miyakawa, Biomechanical
aspects of marginal bone resorption around osseointegrated implants:
Considerations based on a three-dimensional finite element analysis,
Clin. Oral Implant. Res., 15 (2016), 401–412
N. SELV AKUMAR, P. BALAMURUGAN: BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF AN OPTIMIZED PATIENT-SPECIFIC ...
Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 57 (2023) 5, 509–518 517

22
A. M. An, N. Alsabeeha, W. Duncan, Stability of tapered and paral-
lel-walled dental implants: A systematic review and meta-analysis,
Clin. Implant. Dent. Relat. Res., 20 (2018), 634–645
23
H. Arinc, Effects of Prosthetic Material and Framework Design on
Stress Distribution in Dental Implants and Peripheral Bone: A
Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis. Med. Sci. Monit., 24
(2018), 4279–4287
24
T. Wilson, R. Miller, R. D. Trushkowsky, M. Dard, Tapered Implants
in Dentistry, Adv. Dent. Res., 28 (2016), 4–9
25
H. L. Huang, C. H. Chang, J. T. Hsu, A. M. Fallgatter, C. C. Ko,
Comparison of implant body designs and threaded designs of dental
implants: A 3-dimensional finite element analysis, Int. J. Oral
Maxillofac. Implant, 22 (2017), 551–562
26
B. Heidari, H. Bisadi, B. Heidari, M. Kadkhodazadeh, Influence of
different tapered implants on stress and strain distribution in bone
and implant: A finite element analysis. J. Periodontol. Implant.
Dent., 1 (2019), 11–19
27
H. Oliveira, A. B. Velasco, V . Rios, F. S. Lasheras, B. F. Lemos, F. J.
Gil, A. Carvalho, M. Herrero-Clement, Effect of Different Implant
Designs on Strain and Stress Distribution under Non-Axial Loading:
A Three-Dimensional Finite Element Analysis, Int. J. Environ. Res.
Public Health, 17 (2020), 38–47
28
S. Tada, R. Stegaroiu, E. Kitamura, O. Miyakawa, H. Kusakari, In-
fluence of implant design and bone quality on stress/strain distribu-
tion in bone around implants: A 3-dimensional finite element analy-
sis, Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Implant, 18 (2013), 357–368
29
M. Karl, L. A. Irastorza, Does implant design affect primary stability
in extraction sites?, Quintessence Int., 48 (2017), 219–224
30
V. Rios, G. Menjivar, C. Herrero, C. B. Rios, A.P. Fernandez, R.
Perez, F. J. Gil, M. C. Herrero, Unravelling the effect of macro and
microscopic design of dental implants on osseointegration: A ran-
domised clinical study in minipigs, J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Electron, 29
(2018), 85–99
31
T. Irina, C. Wiebe, Initial Torque Stability of a New Bone Con-
densing Dental Implant. A Cohort Study of 140 Consecutively
Placed Implants, J. Oral Implant, 35 (2019), 277–282
32
D. W. Lee, Y . S. Choi, K. H. Park, C. S. Kim, I. S. Moon, Effect of
micro thread on the maintenance of marginal bone level: A 3-year
prospective study, Clin. Oral Implant, 18 (2017), 465–470
33
Udomsawat, P. Rungsiyakull, C. Rungsiyakull, P. Khongkhunthian,
Comparative study of stress characteristics in surrounding bone dur-
ing insertion of dental implants of three different thread designs: A
three-dimensional dynamic finite element study, Clin. Exp. Dent.
Res., 5 (2018), 26–37
34
H. Abuhussein, G. Pagni, A. Rebaudi, H. L. Wang, The effect of
thread pattern upon implant osseointegration, Clin. Oral Implant.
Res., 21 (2020), 129–136
35
M. Geramizadeh, H. Katoozian, R. Amid, M. Kadkhodazadeh, Com-
parison of finite element results with photoelastic stress analysis
around dental implants with different threads, Dent. Med. Probl., 55
(2018), 17–22
36
G. Deste, R. Durkan, Effects of all-on-four implant designs in mandi-
ble on implants and the surrounding bone: A 3-D finite element anal-
ysis, Niger J Clin Pract., 23 (2020) 4456–463, doi:10.4103/njcp.
njcp_471_1
37
M. Geramizadeh, H. Katoozian, R. Amid, M. Kadkhodazadeh,
Static, Dynamic, and Fatigue Finite Element Analysis of Dental Im-
plants with Different Thread Designs, J. Autom. Inf. Sci., 26 (2016),
347–355
38
Q. Wang, Y . Zhang, M. Pang, Y . Wang, J. Yuan, H. Peng, W. Zhang,
L. Dai, W. Li, Biomechanical Comparison of Six Different Root-An-
alog Implants and the Conventional Morse Taper Implant by Finite
Element Analysis, Frontiers in genetics, 21 (2022), 34–45
39
J. Steigenga, K. Al-Shammari, C. Misch, F. H. Nociti, H. L. Wang,
Effects of Implant Thread Geometry on Percentage of
Osseointegration and Resistance to Reverse Torque in the Tibia of
Rabbits, J. Periodontol, 75 (2016), 1233–1241
40
A. Acharya, M. C. T. Leung, M. H. Fan, G. Fokas, N. Mattheos,
Peri-implant marginal bone loss rate pre- and post-loading: An ex-
ploratory analysis of associated factors, Clin. Oral Implant. Res., 30
(2019), 410–419
41
R. Koodaryan, A. Hafezeqoran, Evaluation of Implant Collar Sur-
faces for Marginal Bone Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Anal-
ysis, Biomed. Res. Int., (2016), 1–10
518 Materiali in tehnologije / Materials and technology 57 (2023) 5, 509–518
N. SELV AKUMAR, P. BALAMURUGAN: BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF AN OPTIMIZED PATIENT-SPECIFIC ...