ResearchArticle
Stress Distribution Pattern in Mini Dental Implant-Assisted
RPD with Different Clasp Designs: 3D Finite Element Analysis
Chaiy Rungsiyakull ,
1
Pimduen Rungsiyakull ,
2
Kullapop Suttiat ,
2
and Nut Duangrattanaprathip
3
1
DepartmentofMechanicalEngineering,FacultyofEngineering,ChiangMaiUniversityChiangMai,
ChiangMai50200,ailand
2
DepartmentofProsthodontics,FacultyofDentistry,ChiangMaiUniversity,ChiangMai50200,ailand
3
ProsthodonticsSection,DepartmentofRestorativeDentistry,FacultyofDentistry,NaresuanUniversity,
Phitsanulok65000,ailand
Correspondence should be addressed to Kullapop Suttiat; kullapop@hotmail.com
Received 20 October 2021; Revised 30 January 2022; Accepted 18 February 2022; Published 11 March 2022
Academic Editor: Paolo Francesco Manicone
Copyright © 2022 Chaiy Rungsiyakull et al. is is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.
Introduction. e removable partial denture (RPD) components, especially the retentive arm, play a major role in the loading
characteristic on supporting structures. Objective. To evaluate and compare the effect of different clasp designs on the stress
distribution pattern, maximum von Mises stress, and average hydrostatic pressure on abutment teeth, as well as edentulous ridges,
mini dental implants (MDIs), and peri-implant bone between the conventional removable partial denture (CRPD) and mini
dental implant-assisted distal extension removable partial denture (IARPD) using a three-dimensional finite element analysis (3D
FEA). MaterialsandMethods. 3D FEA models of mandibular arches, with and without bilateral MDI at the second molar areas,
and Kennedy class I RPD frameworks, with RPA, RPI, Akers, and no clasp component, were generated. A total of 200 N vertical
load was bilaterally applied on both sides of distal extension areas, and the stress was analyzed by 3D FEA. Results. e stress
concentration of IARPD with RPI clasp design was located more lingually on abutment teeth, MDI, and peri-implant bone, while
the other designs were observed distally on the supporting structures. e maximum von Mises stress on the abutment root
surface was decreased when the RPDs were assisted with MDIs. e CRPD and IARPD with the Akers clasp design showed the
highest von Mises stress followed by the designs with RPA and RPI clasp, respectively. e average hydrostatic pressure in each
group was in approximation. Conclusion. e placement of MDIs on distal extension ridges helps to reduce the stress con-
centration on denture supporting structures. e maximum von Mises stress is affected by the different designs of clasp
components. e CRPD and the IARPD with RPI clasp provide the least stress on supporting structures.
1. Introduction
Among modern dental treatment modalities, the restoration
of partial edentulous ridges with removable partial denture is
accepted as a standard treatment option [1]. However, the
compromise in denture retention and stability, especially in
the mandible with distal extension base, is the most common
clinical drawback for many patients [2, 3]. e difference in
bearing capacities of the supporting tissues in the distal
extension arch leads to the classic disadvantage of a re-
movable partial denture, moving the denture and abutment
torquing during function [4]. To overcome this inherent
problem, functional impression technique has been applied
to record the tissue in functional form as it reduces torque on
supporting structures due to the difference in resiliency
between the abutment teeth and soft tissue covered on
edentulous ridges [5–7].
Clasp assembly design is the other promising strategy for
altering the load distribution on the supporting structures
[8–12]. e retentive component design based on stress
breaker concept such as RPI or RPA clasp has been rec-
ommended by many clinicians for distal extension case. e
Hindawi
International Journal of Dentistry
Volume 2022, Article ID 2416888, 10 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2416888