Samunahmetoğlu E., Ari I., Yilmaz A.
JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS, cilt.2026, sa.70225, ss.100-108, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
-
Yayın Türü:
Makale / Tam Makale
-
Cilt numarası:
2026
Sayı:
70225
-
Basım Tarihi:
2026
-
Doi Numarası:
10.1111/jopr.70225
-
Dergi Adı:
JOURNAL OF PROSTHODONTICS
-
Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler:
Natural Science Collection (ProQuest), Biological Science Database (ProQuest), Biomedical Reference Collection: Corporate Edition (EBSCO), Health Research Premium Collection (ProQuest), Scopus, Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), EMBASE, MEDLINE
-
Sayfa Sayıları:
ss.100-108
-
Yozgat Bozok Üniversitesi Adresli:
Evet
Özet
Abstract
Purpose
This study aimed to evaluate the effect of different zygomatic implant configurations on the biomechanical behavior of implant‐supported prosthetic systems under varying bone conditions using finite element analysis.
Materials and Methods
Four three‐dimensional (3D) finite element models were developed based on two different anatomical conditions representing Zygoma Anatomy Guided Approach (ZAGA) Type 1 and Type 3. In each ZAGA type, two implant configurations were created by positioning zygomatic implants in different regions: lateral incisor–first molar and first premolar–first molar. All models were subjected to vertical and oblique loading conditions. Stress distribution in the peri‐implant bone, implants, abutments, and metal framework, as well as implant displacement, was analyzed.
Results
Under vertical loading conditions, Models 2 and 4 demonstrated lower stress values and more balanced load distribution, whereas Models 1 and 3 exhibited higher stress concentrations. In contrast, under oblique loading conditions, Models 1 and 3 showed more favorable stress values compared to Models 2 and 4. Implant displacement values were generally higher in Models 2 and 4. Within the limitations of the present finite element analysis, overall biomechanical response patterns were broadly comparable between the ZAGA Type 1 and Type 3 conditions.
Conclusion
Implant configuration appeared to influence the biomechanical behavior of quad zygomatic implant systems under the tested loading conditions. Models 1 and 3 generally showed a more favorable response under oblique loading, whereas the corresponding models in ZAGA Type 1 and Type 3 exhibited broadly comparable biomechanical patterns.