J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2017;11(3): 149-155.
doi: 10.15171/joddd.2017.027
PMID: 29184629
PMCID: PMC5666213
  Abstract View: 1181
  PDF Download: 1349
  Full Text View: 630

Basic Research

Original Article

Stress distribution pattern of screw-retained restorations with segmented vs. non-segmented abutments: A finite element analysis

Shima Aalaei 1, Zahra Rajabi Naraki 2, Fatemeh Nematollahi 3, Elaheh Beyabanaki 4*, Afsaneh Shahrokhi Rad 5

1 Dental Caries Prevention Research Center, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran
2 Private Practice, Qazvin, Iran
3 Department of Prosthodontics, Islamic Azad University, Dental Branch, Tehran, Iran
4 Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
5 Department of Restorative Dentistry and Biomaterials Sciences, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, USA
*Corresponding Author: Email:


Background. Screw-retained restorations are favored in some clinical situations such as limited inter-occlusal spaces. This study was designed to compare stresses developed in the peri-implant bone in two different types of screw-retained restorations (segmented vs. non-segmented abutment) using a finite element model. Methods. An implant, 4.1 mm in diameter and 10 mm in length, was placed in the first molar site of a mandibular model with 1 mm of cortical bone on the buccal and lingual sides. Segmented and non-segmented screw abutments with their crowns were placed on the simulated implant in each model. After loading (100 N, axial and 45° non-axial), von Mises stress was recorded using ANSYS software, version 12.0.1. Results. The maximum stresses in the non-segmented abutment screw were less than those of segmented abutment (87 vs. 100, and 375 vs. 430 MPa under axial and non-axial loading, respectively). The maximum stresses in the peri-implant bone for the model with segmented abutment were less than those of non-segmented ones (21 vs. 24 MPa, and 31 vs. 126 MPa under vertical and angular loading, respectively). In addition, the micro-strain of peri-implant bone for the segmented abutment restoration was less than that of non-segmented abutment. Conclusion. Under axial and non-axial loadings, non-segmented abutment showed less stress concentration in the screw, while there was less stress and strain in the peri-implant bone in the segmented abutment.
First Name
Last Name
Email Address
Security code

Abstract View: 1181

Your browser does not support the canvas element.

PDF Download: 1349

Your browser does not support the canvas element.

Full Text View: 630

Your browser does not support the canvas element.

ePublished: 20 Sep 2017
EndNote EndNote

(Enw Format - Win & Mac)

BibTeX BibTeX

(Bib Format - Win & Mac)

Bookends Bookends

(Ris Format - Mac only)

EasyBib EasyBib

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Medlars Medlars

(Txt Format - Win & Mac)

Mendeley Web Mendeley Web
Mendeley Mendeley

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Papers Papers

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

ProCite ProCite

(Ris Format - Win & Mac)

Reference Manager Reference Manager

(Ris Format - Win only)

Refworks Refworks

(Refworks Format - Win & Mac)

Zotero Zotero

(Ris Format - Firefox Plugin)