Limpiwatana Seehachart, Nagaviroj Noppavan
Residency Training in Prosthodontics, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Eur J Dent. 2024 May;18(2):493-500. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1772245. Epub 2023 Sep 20.
The aim of this study was to compare intaglio surface adaptation of the removable partial denture framework among various data acquisition techniques and fabrication approaches using three-dimensional comparison by metrology software.
The partial edentulous typodont model with five digital superimposition landmarks was duplicated and scanned for the digital reference model. Three approaches were the conventional lost-wax (group I; LWT, = 5), intraoral digital impressions combined with PolyJet printing and lost-wax (group II; IP-LWT, = 5), and extraoral digital impressions combined with PolyJet printing and lost-wax (group III; EP-LWT, = 5). Each framework was scanned and superimposed with the reference model. The misfits at 53 locations were measured.
Data were statistically analyzed by one-way analysis of variance, followed by Tukey's honestly significant difference for pairwise comparisons ( < 0.05).
Significant differences were found between three approaches at the reciprocal arm, terminal part of the retentive arm, rest, and major connector ( < 0.05). In the LWT group, the reciprocal arm and palatal vault region of major connector had the lowest misfits, but the highest misfit was found in the midline region ( < 0.001). In the IP-LWT group revealed the most excessive contact at the terminal part of the retentive arm (-0.111 ± 0.038 mm, = 0.031), with the highest misfit at the rest area ( < 0.001).
A difference in adaptation was found in several removable partial denture framework components among three approaches. The LWT group had a better adaptation than other groups. Nevertheless, a clinically acceptable adaptation was seen in all three approaches.
本研究旨在通过计量软件进行三维比较，比较各种数据采集技术和制作方法下可摘局部义齿支架的凹面适应性。
复制带有五个数字叠加标志点的部分无牙列模型牙，并扫描以获取数字参考模型。三种方法分别为传统失蜡法（第一组；LWT，n = 5）、口内数字印模结合PolyJet打印和失蜡法（第二组；IP-LWT，n = 5）以及口外数字印模结合PolyJet打印和失蜡法（第三组；EP-LWT，n = 5）。对每个支架进行扫描并与参考模型叠加。测量53个位置的不贴合度。
数据采用单因素方差分析进行统计学分析，随后进行Tukey氏真实显著差异的两两比较（P < 0.05）。
在三个方法之间，在交互臂、固位臂末端、支托和大连接体处发现显著差异（P < 0.05）。在LWT组中，交互臂和大连接体的腭穹窿区域不贴合度最低，但在中线区域发现最高的不贴合度（P < 0.001）。在IP-LWT组中，固位臂末端显示出最多的过度接触（-0.111±0.038 mm，P = 0.031），在支托区域不贴合度最高（P < 0.001）。
在三种方法中，几种可摘局部义齿支架部件的适应性存在差异。LWT组的适应性优于其他组。然而，在所有三种方法中均观察到临床上可接受的适应性。
