Method for selecting implant components

Abstract

Methods of selecting or designing an implant to be used in a patient are provided. A CT scan of a patient's mouth is performed. A 3D CAD model of the patient's mouth is created utilizing data generated by the CT scan. Properties of the patient's mouth are determined based upon CT scan data and assigned to the 3D CAD model. A desired location for an implant is selected. A FEA simulation is performed on the 3D CAD model to choose an implant or to design an implant that optimizes a selected variable.

Claims

1. A method of verifying a finite element analysis (FEA) modeling, the method comprising: creating a 3D CAD model of a calibration sample; determining properties of the calibration sample; assigning the determined properties of the calibration sample to the 3D CAD model; selecting a desired location for an implant; performing an FEA simulation of the implant being installed in the calibration sample with the 3D CAD model; measure data from actual placement of the implant into the calibration sample; compare the measured data with the FEA simulation.

2. The method of claim 1, further including: performing a CT scan of the calibration material.

3. The method of claim 2, wherein the properties of the calibration sample are known properties.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein performing the FEA simulation is a real-time simulation of placing the implant into the calibration sample.

5. The method of claim 1, further including: installing the implant into the calibration material.

6. The method of claim 5, wherein the implant is installed into the calibration material using a test fixture that measures the data during the placement of the implant into the calibration sample.

7. The method of claim 6, wherein the data includes 1) a torque required to install the implant, 2) a stress and strain level of the implant, and 3) a stress and strain level of the calibration sample adjacent to the implant.

8. The method of claim 1, wherein comparing the measured data with the FEA simulation includes: determining whether the FEA simulation accurately predicts the measured data.

9. The method of claim 8, wherein; when the FEA simulation does not accurately predicts the measured data, the method includes: adjusting FEA simulation variables; and reperforming the FEA simulation with the adjusted FEA simulation variables.

10. The method of claim 8, wherein; when the FEA simulation accurately predicts the measured data, the method includes: confirming calibration of the FEA simulation such that the FEA calibration can be used on patients.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

(1) FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a method according to one process for selecting a dental implant by utilizing a Finite Element Analysis (FEA) simulation:

(2) FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a method according to another process for selecting a dental implant by utilizing a FEA simulation;

(3) FIG. 3 is a block diagram of a method according to a further process for designing a dental implant by utilizing a FEA simulation;

(4) FIG. 4 is a block diagram of a method according to one process for verifying a FEA simulation.

(5) While the invention is susceptible to various modifications and alternative forms, specific embodiments thereof have been shown by way of example in the drawings and will herein be described in detail. It should be understood, however, that it is not intended to limit the invention to the particular forms disclosed but, on the contrary, the intention is to cover all modifications, equivalents, and alternatives falling within the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims.

DESCRIPTION OF ILLUSTRATIVE EMBODIMENTS

(6) As shown in FIG. 1 a method 10 is shown to determine initial implant stability. As shown in block 12, a CT scan is performed on a patient. It is contemplated that various types of CT scans may be performed, such as Concentric CT scans or Cone-Beam CT scans. The CT scan produces data that may be used in forming a 3D CAD model of a patient's mouth within a CAD system as depicted in block 14. The CT scan allows a determination to be made regarding the type of bone found in the patient's mandible or maxilla where the implant is to be placed.

(7) For example, the CT scan allows a practitioner to determine that Type I bone is present, a bone type that has almost all cortical bone tissue. Similarly, the CT scan may reveal that Type II, Type III, or Type IV bone is present at additional different planned implant locations. The various bone types have properties associated therewith, such as Type I bone being harder than Type IV bone. An implant being placed in Type I bone requires additional torque to seat the implant than an implant being placed in Type IV bone.

(8) It is additionally contemplated that other technologies than CT scanning may be utilized to generate data used to form the 3D CAD model, such as ultrasonic scanning, MRI, or other scanning techniques.

(9) Once the type, or types, of bone that implants will be placed in is determined, material properties for the bone may be assigned to the 3D CAD model of the patient's mouth, as shown in block 16.

(10) The 3D CAD model of the patient's mouth allows a practitioner to determine locations to place the implants to be utilized, and also allows the practitioner to select particular implants to use on the patient. First, by analyzing the patient's particular anatomical structure, the practitioner determines desired locations for implants at block 18. Based on the patient's anatomical structure at the desired locations, a practitioner selects an implant to be placed within the patient at block 20. As the general ranges for material properties for Type I-Type IV bone are known, the 3D CAD model of the bones of the patient are assigned material properties at block 22. The assigning of material properties may be performed automatically by software based on the results of the CT scan, or a practitioner may analyze the CT scan and assign material properties to the 3D CAD model of the patient based on what is shown on the CT scan. Based on output from CT scan, such as the number of Hounstield's units obtained from the CT scan, a bone type may be obtained.

(11) The CAD system contains a library of dental implants and other restorative components that a practitioner may choose from when developing a treatment plan for a patient. As shown at block 24, the practitioner selects a proposed implant to use within a first implant site of the patient within the CAD system. The CAD system contains a library of dental implants, so that 3D models exist of the various implants that a practitioner may select. The selection of a proposed implant also causes the CAD system to create an osteotomy for the selected implant at the first implant site of the 3D CAD model.

(12) As depicted in block 26, once the practitioner has selected a proposed implant, a finite element analysis (FEA) simulation is preformed. The FEA simulation may evaluate placing the implant into a patient's bone, the implant and bone immediately after placement of the implant, and further may analyze the implant and bone after oseointegration occurs. Thus, the FEA simulation analyzes the characteristics and conditions the implant and the bone as the implant is being placed into the bone, not just following the placement of the implant.

(13) The FEA simulation of the implant placement analyzes the torque necessary to seat the implant into the bone. Based on the bone type present in the area around the implant site, as well as the characteristics of the implant and characteristic of the osteotomy, the amount of torque required to drive the implant into the bone is determined using the FEA simulation. After the simulation has determined the torque required to seat the implant within the bone, initial implant stability is analyzed. Knowing the amount of torque required to seat the implant is important, as using more torque than required to obtain a needed level of initial implant stability can generate more friction between the implant and the bone, which generates heat that can damage bone cells near the implant.

(14) Initial implant stability is a measure of the stiffness of the connection between the bone and the dental implant, prior to osseointegration occurring. Initial implant stability can be used to determine how likely it is that the implant may loosen prior to osscointegration occurring. The higher the initial implant stability, the less likely the implant is to come loose. Factors that may influence initial implant stability, and that can be accounted for in the FEA simulation, include implant geometry, such as the thread design and implant size, bone type, and osteotomy properties, such as osteotomy geometry, whether the osteotomy has a counter sink, and whether the osteotomy is tapped.

(15) Further, the FEA simulation may be used to calculate a resonant frequency of the implant and bone assembly, at the time of implantation. A resonant frequency analysis (RFA) allows a practitioner to track the osseointegration of the implant. As the implant is integrated into the bone, the resonant frequency changes, indicating to the practitioner how osseointegration is progressing.

(16) The FEA simulation further may be used to analyze the stress and strain generated as the implant is placed in to the osteotomy. This analysis can be used to evaluate the stress and strain at the interface of the bone and the implant, as well as the stress and strain within the patient's bone. Thus, the FEA simulation allows a practitioner to determine the potential stress and strain that will exist within the patient as the implant is placed into the bone.

(17) Thus, the FEA simulation allows a practitioner to evaluate many factors of a selected implant in a 3D virtual environment, prior to performing any surgical procedures on a patient. Thus, a practitioner may select an implant, virtually place the implant into the 3D model of the patient's bone, and perform an FEA simulation on the implant and the bone as the implant is being placed into the 3D model of the patient's bone.

(18) From the FEA simulation, a practitioner may determine, as shown in block 28, whether the selected implant offers necessary initial implant stability without requiring too high a level of torque being needed to place the implant into the patient's bone and without placing too much stress or strain on the bone. If the practitioner determines that the FEA simulation indicates that the selected implant meets the patient's clinical needs and offers appropriate initial implant stability without producing too much stress or strain within the bone or at the bone and implant interface, the practitioner has verified that an acceptable implant has been selected.

(19) If the selected implant is determined to not meet the patient's clinical needs, the practitioner selects a different implant, and repeats the process as shown in blocks 20-28 until an acceptable implant is found.

(20) Once an acceptable implant is found, as shown in block 30, it is determined if there are any additional implant locations that need to be analyzed. If there are additional implant locations, the practitioner repeats the process shown in blocks 18-28 until there are no additional implant locations.

(21) Once every desired implant location has been analyzed and an appropriate implant for each proposed location found, the FEA simulation may be ended.

(22) It is contemplated that the FEA simulation may allow one or more of the properties to be optimized. For example, initial implant stability may be optimized, such that the selected implant allows immediate loading in a manner that will be less likely to cause the implant to come loose prior to osseointegration. Similarly, an implant may be selected that maximizes the initial implant stability relative to a given maximum torque required to install an implant.

(23) Turning now to FIG. 2, a method 100 is shown that depicts a similar method to the method 10 depicted in FIG. 1, expect the method 100 of FIG. 2 uses software to optimize the implant selection based on a selected criteria or criterion.

(24) As shown in block 112, a CT scan is performed on a patient that is used in block 114 to create a 3D CAD model of the patient's mouth. Based on the CT scan, properties of the patient's bone may be determined, as shown in block 116. It is contemplated that the properties of the patient's bone may be determined by selecting the types of bone in a patient's mouth, and assigning properties to regions of the 3D CAD model based upon typical material properties for that type of bone as shown in block 118. Alternatively, the CT scan may be used to determine bone density such that a magnitude of bone density is assigned various regions within the 3D CAD model based upon the CT scan.

(25) Once the 3D CAD model has been assigned properties based upon the CT scan, the practitioner determines the desired locations for implant placement, as shown at block 120. Next, as shown in block 122, the practitioner determines at least one variable to optimize utilizing a FEA simulation. The variable to be optimized may be, for example, the initial implant stability, the amount of torque to install an implant, an acceptable amount of stress and strain within the bone around the implant, some other variable, or some combination of variables. An example of a combination of variables would be to optimize the initial implant stability for a low torque level required to seat an implant.

(26) After the variable, or variables, to be optimized is selected, a FEA simulation of implant placement is performed at block 124. The FEA simulation may evaluate a plurality of implants contained in a library of the 3D CAD system. The FEA simulation produces a result at block 126 that informs a practitioner of the implant that optimizes the result for the variable, or variables, the practitioner had selected. For example, if a practitioner had chosen to maximize initial implant stability while minimizing placement torque, the FEA simulation would be performed on a variety of implants, and the FEA simulation would inform the practitioner of the particular implant that best meets the selected criterion. Once the implant for a first desired location has been selected, it is determined at block 128 if there are any additional implants required by the patient. If additional implants are required, the method returns to step 120 for the next implant. If there are no additional implants, the FEA simulation is ended, as shown in block 130.

(27) It is contemplated according to another method that the practitioner may constrain the results given by the FEA simulation as shown in FIG. 2. For example, the practitioner may specify a diameter for the implant, and then the FEA simulation will be limited to optimizing the criterion selected only for implants of the chosen diameter. Additional examples of variable constraints the practitioner may place on the FEA simulation include, but are not limited to, implant length, implant thread design, osteotomy profile, whether the osteotomy has a countersink, and whether the osteotomy is tapped.

(28) As shown in FIG. 3, a further method 200 is shown in which a custom patient specific implant is designed based upon an FEA simulation. Similar to the methods previously described, a CT scan of a patient's mouth is taken at block 212. From the CT scan, a 3D CAD model of the patient's mouth is created, as depicted at block 214. As depicted at block 216, properties of the patient's bone are determined from the CT scan, such as bone type, or bone density. Once the properties of the patient's mouth are determined, the properties are assigned to 3D CAD model of the patient's mouth at block 218.

(29) At block 220 of FIG. 3, the practitioner then selects desired locations for at least one implant. The practitioner at block 222 selects at least one variable to optimize using an FEA simulation, such as, for example, creating a high level of initial implant stability with a low level of torque required to seat the implant.

(30) An FEA simulation is performed on the 3D CAD model to determine implant-design variables at step 224. Based upon the implant-design variables determined by the FEA simulation, a custom implant is designed for the patient that optimizes the at least one variable previously selected by the practitioner, as shown at block 226. A 3D CAD model of the custom implant is created at block 228 that may be used to machine a custom implant. The method determines at block 230 if there is an additional implant required by the patient. If there is, the method returns to block 220 if not, the FEA simulation is ended as shown at block 232.

(31) It is contemplated according to some processes that a limited number of implant design variables may be modified to create a custom implant for a patient. Implant variables that may be modified include, but are not limited to, implant diameter, implant length, implant material, implant surface preparation, and implant thread design including thread type, thread width, diameter, and the thread pitch.

(32) While an FEA simulation is a valuable tool for selecting or designing a proper implant for a patient, the FEA simulation must be verified by comparing an FEA simulation with measured data collected when placing an implant into a sample, as shown by method 300 in FIG. 4. FIG. 4 illustrates the manner in which the FEA modeling analysis is verified.

(33) As shown at block 310, a CT scan is performed on a calibration sample. Actual material properties of the calibration sample are known. Data generated by the CT scan of the calibration sample is used to form a 3D CAD model of the calibration sample at block 312. Next, properties of the calibration sample are determined at block 314 and assigned to the 3D CAD model at block 316. A desired location for placing the implant within the calibration sample is selected at block 318. Block 320 depicts a FEA simulation being performed on the 3D CAD model.

(34) As shown at block 322, an actual implant is placed into the calibration sample. The implant is placed into the calibration sample using a test fixture that measures data during the placement of the implant into the calibration sample as shown at block 324. Examples of data that may be collected include the torque required to place the implant, the stress and strain levels of the implant, and the stress and strain level of the calibration sample near the implant. Once the measured data is obtained, the FEA simulation results are compared to the measured data, as shown at block 326. Next it is determined whether the FEA simulation result compares favorably with the measured data, as shown in block 328. If the FEA simulation does not accurately predict the measured data, FEA simulation variables are adjusted at block 330. Non-limiting examples of variables that may be adjusted include material properties, such as the modulus of elasticity of the bone, the yield strength of the bone or implant, shear strength of the bone or implant, mechanical properties, failure criteria, such as why the implant or bone failed, and failure response, such as what happened to the bone after failure. After adjusting the FEA simulation variables, the FEA simulation is performed again using the adjusted variables as shown at block 332. The adjusted FEA simulation results are then again compared with the measured data, and this process repeats until the FEA simulation results closely track the measured data. Once the FEA simulation is determined to accurately predict the measured data, the FEA simulation is considered to be properly calibrated, as shown at block 334.

(35) Once the method 300 depicted in FIG. 4 is completed, one of the previous analysis methods shown in FIGS. 1-3 may be performed with confidence that the FEA simulation model produces results that accurately predict the forces and stresses present during the placement of the implant.

(36) While the above methods have been described using CT scanning to generate data to form a 3D CAD model, it is contemplated that other methods may be used to gather this data. For example, an X-ray may be used in place of CT scan.

(37) While the above embodiments have related to dental implants, it is contemplated that the above described methods may be utilized on other regions of a patient's body with other types of non-dental implants, such as orthopedic implants.

(38) While particular embodiments and applications of the present invention have been illustrated and described, it is to be understood that the invention is not limited to the precise construction and compositions disclosed herein and that various modifications, changes, and variations may be apparent from the foregoing descriptions without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined in the appended claims.