Abstract
Background: Any prosthodontic treatment should be preceded with thorough planning to ensure its viability. In the era of digital dentistry, there has been interest to execute the planning procedure digitally. In order to accept the digital planning, it should provide an outcome that is, at least, similar to that produced by the conventional methods.
Objective: To compare digital planning, in the form of digital wax-up, with the outcome of conventional wax-up in relation to precision, axial contour, occlusion and aesthetics.
Materials and Methods: A total of 25 dental arch models of 15 patients were collected. Each set of models was duplicated twice. One set received conventional wax-up and the other was used for the digital wax-up. The pre-treatment models and the conventional wax-up models were converted to digital models after scanning by a micro-CT scanner. This allowed for a direct digital comparison between all the models. In order to evaluate the impact of each diagnostic wax-up on precision, axial contour, occlusion and aesthetics, the following digital tools were implemented: image registration and virtual measurements.
Results: After the wax-up modifications, the dentitions were returned to a more natural status. The conventional and digital wax-ups were similar in relation to precision, contour, occlusion and aesthetics. At the gingival level, the digital wax-up appeared to be slightly more accurate than the conventional wax-up. On the contrary, the accuracy of the occlusal contacts for the digital wax-up was slightly inferior to the occlusal contacts of the conventional wax-up. The axial contour increase was greater for the digital wax-up; however, the actual difference was minimal. In terms of occlusal contact number and area, and lateral occlusal relationship; the two wax-ups yielded similar outcomes. The two wax-ups had equally altered the aesthetic value to the teeth; however, the digital wax-up appeared to have an advantage of providing more natural and symmetrical appearance.
Conclusion: Digital wax-up appears to be very promising in planning for prosthodontic treatment. In general the outcomes of the two wax-ups were comparable.
Objective: To compare digital planning, in the form of digital wax-up, with the outcome of conventional wax-up in relation to precision, axial contour, occlusion and aesthetics.
Materials and Methods: A total of 25 dental arch models of 15 patients were collected. Each set of models was duplicated twice. One set received conventional wax-up and the other was used for the digital wax-up. The pre-treatment models and the conventional wax-up models were converted to digital models after scanning by a micro-CT scanner. This allowed for a direct digital comparison between all the models. In order to evaluate the impact of each diagnostic wax-up on precision, axial contour, occlusion and aesthetics, the following digital tools were implemented: image registration and virtual measurements.
Results: After the wax-up modifications, the dentitions were returned to a more natural status. The conventional and digital wax-ups were similar in relation to precision, contour, occlusion and aesthetics. At the gingival level, the digital wax-up appeared to be slightly more accurate than the conventional wax-up. On the contrary, the accuracy of the occlusal contacts for the digital wax-up was slightly inferior to the occlusal contacts of the conventional wax-up. The axial contour increase was greater for the digital wax-up; however, the actual difference was minimal. In terms of occlusal contact number and area, and lateral occlusal relationship; the two wax-ups yielded similar outcomes. The two wax-ups had equally altered the aesthetic value to the teeth; however, the digital wax-up appeared to have an advantage of providing more natural and symmetrical appearance.
Conclusion: Digital wax-up appears to be very promising in planning for prosthodontic treatment. In general the outcomes of the two wax-ups were comparable.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Qualification | Doctor of Philosophy |
Awarding Institution |
|
Supervisors/Advisors |
|
Publication status | Unpublished - 2015 |