The International journal of prosthodontics · 2023
Accuracy of Indirect Veneer Mock-Up in Comparison to Diagnostic Wax-Up.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Moldovani Domna, Diamantopoulou Sofia, Edelhoff Daniel, Papazoglou Efstratios
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the dimensional discrepancy between the diagnostic wax-up and the resulting mock-up.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A maxillary model with misaligned teeth was scanned, and an initial cast was 3D printed. A total of 60 identical casts were 3D printed from the initial one after scanning. Based on a digital additive veneer wax-up on the six anterior teeth, 10 more casts were 3D printed. The specimens were allocated to seven groups (n = 10) as follows-group 1: transparent silicone matrix with a flowable light-cured composite resin; group 2: same as group 1 but with the addition of a prefabricated transparent tray; group 3: silicone impression putty (65 Shore A) and light-body silicone impression material with a dual-cured bisacryl resin; group 4: same as group 3 but without the light-body silicone; group 5: silicone laboratory putty (92 Shore A) with a dual-cured bisacryl resin; group 6: silicone laboratory putty (92 Shore A) with PMMA; group 7: wax-up casts (control). Scans from the mock-ups were coregistered, segmented, and superimposed with the scans from the wax-up. The difference between the mock-up and the wax-up was quantified by morphologic operations. Results were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunn post hoc test (P < .05).
RESULTS: All mock-ups were larger than the wax-up. Significant differences were found for every labial surface third. The incisal third was the least accurate third while the middle third the most accurate. The most accurate were groups 2 and 5, and the largest discrepancy was observed in group 6.
CONCLUSIONS: The analog mock-up differs dimensionally from the wax-up, regardless of the technique/materials used.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A maxillary model with misaligned teeth was scanned, and an initial cast was 3D printed. A total of 60 identical casts were 3D printed from the initial one after scanning. Based on a digital additive veneer wax-up on the six anterior teeth, 10 more casts were 3D printed. The specimens were allocated to seven groups (n = 10) as follows-group 1: transparent silicone matrix with a flowable light-cured composite resin; group 2: same as group 1 but with the addition of a prefabricated transparent tray; group 3: silicone impression putty (65 Shore A) and light-body silicone impression material with a dual-cured bisacryl resin; group 4: same as group 3 but without the light-body silicone; group 5: silicone laboratory putty (92 Shore A) with a dual-cured bisacryl resin; group 6: silicone laboratory putty (92 Shore A) with PMMA; group 7: wax-up casts (control). Scans from the mock-ups were coregistered, segmented, and superimposed with the scans from the wax-up. The difference between the mock-up and the wax-up was quantified by morphologic operations. Results were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunn post hoc test (P < .05).
RESULTS: All mock-ups were larger than the wax-up. Significant differences were found for every labial surface third. The incisal third was the least accurate third while the middle third the most accurate. The most accurate were groups 2 and 5, and the largest discrepancy was observed in group 6.
CONCLUSIONS: The analog mock-up differs dimensionally from the wax-up, regardless of the technique/materials used.