Biomechanical evaluation of porous tantalum and titanium dental implants under different bone quality conditions using three-dimensional finite element analysis

This study aimed to compare the biomechanical responses of titanium and porous tantalum implants under different bone quality conditions using three-dimensional finite element analysis with sequential loading conditions simulating posterior mastication. Three-dimensional finite element models of titanium and porous tantalum implants placed in Type II (D2) and Type IV (D4) bone conditions were constructed based on cone-beam computed tomography data. Porous tantalum was modeled as a homogeneous equivalent material using an effective elastic modulus. Sequential loading conditions representing different phases of a posterior masticatory cycle were applied. Equivalent von Mises stress distributions within the implant components and surrounding cortical and cancellous bone tissues were evaluated. Stress distribution was influenced by both bone quality and implant material. Compared with D2 bone, D4 bone conditions resulted in higher stress concentrations within the implant system and surrounding tissues. Titanium implants exhibited higher peak von Mises stress values at the implant body and implant–abutment connection region, particularly under D4 bone conditions. Porous tantalum implants demonstrated lower peak stress concentrations within the implant components, while showing increased stress transfer to surrounding cancellous bone compared with titanium implants. The highest stress values were observed during oblique loading phases. Within the limitations of this finite element study, porous tantalum implants demonstrated potentially favorable stress-transfer characteristics compared with titanium implants under the simulated loading conditions, particularly under low-density bone conditions. The lower elastic modulus of porous tantalum may contribute to a more balanced redistribution of mechanical loads between the implant structure and surrounding bone tissues. However, these findings should not be interpreted as direct evidence of superior clinical performance, and further experimental and clinical studies are required to validate the potential biomechanical benefits of porous tantalum implants.