| Autor: |
Cotrina-Peregrín MD; Doctoral Student in Cancer Biology and Clinic and Translational Medicine program, Faculty of Medicine, University of Salamanca, 37008 Salamanca, Spain.; Faculty of Health Sciences, Alfonso X el Sabio University, 28691 Madrid, Spain., Arrieta-Blanco P; Faculty of Health Sciences, Alfonso X el Sabio University, 28691 Madrid, Spain., Aragoneses-Lamas JM; Faculty of Health Sciences, Alfonso X el Sabio University, 28691 Madrid, Spain.; Department of Dentistry, Universidad Federico Henríquez y Carvajal, Santo Domingo 10106, Dominican Republic., Albaladejo Martínez A; Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Salamanca, 37008 Salamanca, Spain., Lobo Galindo AB; Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Salamanca, 37008 Salamanca, Spain., Zubizarreta-Macho Á; Faculty of Health Sciences, Alfonso X el Sabio University, 28691 Madrid, Spain.; Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Salamanca, 37008 Salamanca, Spain. |
| Abstrakt: |
The aim of this study was to analyze and compare the accuracy of a novel interproximal enamel reduction (IPR) technique based on a computer-aided static navigation technique with respect to a conventional free-hand-based technique for interproximal enamel reduction. Twenty anatomical-based experimental cast models of polyurethane were randomly distributed into the following IPR techniques: IPR technique based on computer-aided static navigation technique ( n = 10) (GI) for Group A and conventional free-hand-based technique for the IPR ( n = 10) (FHT) for Group B. The anatomical-based experimental cast models of polyurethane randomly assigned to the GI study group were submitted for a preoperative 3D intraoral surface scan; then, datasets were uploaded into 3D implant-planning software to design virtual templates for the interproximal enamel reduction technique. Afterward, the anatomical-based experimental cast models of polyurethane of both GI and FHT study groups were subjected to a postoperative digital impression by a 3D intraoral surface scan to compare the accuracy of the interproximal enamel reduction techniques at the buccal (mm), lingual/palatal (mm), and angular (◦) levels using the Student t -test. Statistically significant differences between the interproximal enamel reduction technique based on the computer-aided static navigation technique and the conventional free-hand-based technique for the interproximal enamel reduction at the buccal ( p = 0.0008) and lingual/palatal ( p < 0.0001) levels; however, no statistically significant differences were shown at the angular level ( p = 0.1042). The interproximal enamel reduction technique based on computer-aided static navigation technique was more accurate than the conventional free-hand-based technique for interproximal enamel reduction. |
