| Popis: |
Purpose To evaluate the dimensional discrepancy between the diagnostic wax-up and the resulting mock-up. Materials 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, and based on a digital additive veneer wax-up on the 6 anterior teeth, 10 more casts were 3D printed. The specimens were allocated to seven groups (n = 10 each). Group 1: transparent silicone matrix with a flowable light-curing composite resin; group 2: same as group 1, with the addition of a prefabricated transparent tray; group 3: silicone impression putty (65 on the Shore A hardness scale) and light-body silicone impression material with a dual-curing bis-acryl resin; group 4: same as group 3 without light-body silicone; group 5: silicone laboratory putty (92 Shore A) with a dual-curing bis-acryl resin; group 6: silicone laboratory putty (92 Shore A) with PMMA; and group 7: wax-up casts (control). Scans from the mock-ups were co-registered, segmented, and superimposed with the scans from the wax-up. The difference of the mock-up compared to the wax-up was quantified using morphologic operations. The results were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunn post hoc test (P Results All mock-ups were larger in size in comparison to the wax-up. Significant differences were found for every labial surface third. The incisal third was the most inaccurate third, while the middle third was the most accurate. The most accurate groups were 2 and 5, and the largest discrepancy was observed in group 6. Conclusion The analog mock-up differed dimensionally from the wax-up, irrespective of the technique/materials used. |
