## 3 Results  
Data concerning mathematical solutions have been converted into visual results as color gradients range from red to blue. The blue color indicated the minimum stress, whereas the red one the maximum stress. All the shades present in this range were considered as the stress variation. Subsequently, stress values were measured at different points collected from the studied models and then compared. Von Mises equivalent stress levels were used to identify points with the greatest stress for both dental implants and bone [42]. Figure 6 shows results of Von Mises stresses on both cortical and trabecular bones and on implants.  
Von Mises stresses displayed in Figure 6 at various depths of implant positioning show how the stress was higher in case of implant positioning at the same level of the bone (equicrestally). In addition, it was detected higher stresses in the cortical bone than in the trabecular bone due to the different stiffness of materials. In particular, in the equicrestal positioning, it can be observed how the first four fillets of the thread recorded stresses ranging between 80 and 170 MPa, while the latest fillets recorded stress values ranging from 3 MPa to 30 MPa.  
In the apical area of the implant, it can be observed how the equicrestal positioning induced a compressive stress on the surrounding bone, reaching a stress level of approximately 50 MPa. However, this value did not compromise the strength of the trabecular bone, as the compressive strength of the trabecular bone relies on both its density and unique structure, and it is precisely this structure that gives it a greater resilience than the cortical bone that is more compact. On the other hand, the maximum trabecular bone stresses were registered close to the implant head, and they linearly decreased with the decrease of bone depth. Indeed, stresses on the cortical and trabecular bones increased when the thickness of the cortical bone decreased.  
The applied oblique loading caused higher Von Mises stress values on both cortical and trabecular bones. After the evaluation of stresses in the bone around the equicrestally and \(-1\) mm and \(-2\) mm subrestally placed implants, three different situations could be observed: the highest stress could be recorded within the cortical bone around the equicrestally inserted implant, the intermediate stress around the subrestal implant placed  
Figure 5: The implant–abutment contact condition set at 0.3 as frictional coefficient.  
at \(-1\) mm, and the lowest one was detected in the subcrestal implant placed at \(-2\) mm (Figures 6 and 7).  
Figure 7 demonstrates that as soon as implants further penetrated the jaw, stresses in the cortical bone decreased, whereas stresses in the trabecular bone increased. The maximum stresses found in the cortical bone decreased from 60 to 20 MPa, while in the trabecular bone, the region experiencing stresses greater than 8 MPa expanded up to three threads of the implant screw. However, from the results, it was possible to notice how under eccentric load the subcrestal implant positioning was able to transfer a compression stress from the cortical bone to the trabecular bone in a more uniform manner.  
Figure 6: [PERSON] stresses in the three analyzed implant models: (**a**) equicrestally, (**b**) subcrestally (\(-1\) mm), and (**c**) subcrestally (\(-2\) mm) positioned.