ABSTRACT
AIM: The aim of the present study was to evaluate labiopalatal angulation of maxillary anterior teeth using Custom-made jig, Profile projector, and ImageJ computer software methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The subjects for this study were selected in the age-group of 20-30 years having permanent dentition, including 2nd molars and bilateral Angle's class 1 molar and canine relationship. Recording the labiopalatal angulation in proximal view was carried out by using one manual method and two digital methods namely using Custom-made jig, Profile projector, and ImageJ computer software, respectively. Alginate impressions were made for the subjects, and the spatial relationship of the maxilla to the cranium was recorded using a facebow. The casts were mounted in a semi-adjustable articulator, and the articulated mounted casts with the mounting ring were transferred to the Custom-made jig, and angulations were measured in proximal view. Digital methods of measurement were recorded by using Profile projector and ImageJ computer software methods. Data were tabulated and statistically analyzed. RESULTS: In males, the mean labiopalatal angulation of maxillary right and left maxillary canines of Custom-made jig was 91.94 ± 1.47 and 91.70 ± 1.68, in Profile projector method 87.41 ± 3.75 and 87.58 ± 3.79, and in ImageJ computer software 84.23 ± 5.72 and 83.29 ± 6.74, respectively. In females, Custom-made jig was 91.82 ± 1.55 and 92.17 ± 1.84, in Profile projector method 86.70 ± 5.58 and 86.94 ± 5.57, and in ImageJ computer software 82.76 ± 6.34 and 83.05 ± 6.12, respectively. There was a very high statistically significant difference found between different methods. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the values obtained in the digital methods (i.e., both the Profile projector and ImageJ computer software) were more accurate than the manual method. However, the ImageJ computer software was most reliable in comparison with the values obtained in Profile projector. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The labiopalatal angulation of anterior teeth will act as a guideline in re-establishing the correct angulations and the anatomic contours of the maxillary arch to achieve the desired esthetics that provide adequate lip support and to restore the required functions.
Subject(s)
Esthetics, Dental , Tooth , Male , Female , Animals , Molar , Software , MaxillaABSTRACT
AIM: The aim of the present study was to assess the occlusal stress on the implant-abutment junction and implant-bone interface of a long-span implant-supported prosthesis made of two different prosthetic materials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A computerized tomography of the mandible was used to get the finite element model of the bone. The comparative groups were made as follows: S1 and S2 - 3.7 × 11 mm (44 region) and 4.5 × 11 mm (47 region), S1A and S2A - screw-retained porcelain-fused-to-metal prosthesis, S1B and S2B - cement-retained porcelain-fused-to-metal prosthesis, S1C and S2C - screw-retained zirconia prosthesis, and S1D - cement-retained zirconia prosthesis. Maximum stress generated on the implant-abutment interface of all the prostheses under vertical and oblique load was assessed. RESULTS: For all the comparative groups, maximum level of stress was generated at the cervical level of the implant-bone interface in comparison to the apical and middle-third level under both vertical and oblique load. No statistically significant difference between zirconia and porcelain-fused-to-metal prosthesis was seen at the implant-abutment interface and the cervical third of the implant-bone interface. A significant difference was found between all screw-retained and cement-retained groups. CONCLUSION: The present study concluded that the short implants in combination with standard-length implants using either porcelain-fused-to-metal or zirconia as prosthetic material in the form of long-span implant-supported prosthesis can be a viable treatment option in the posterior mandible. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The accuracy of the diagnosis, examination, and knowledge of the site where the implant must be inserted, and the choice of superstructure is important for the stability and lifespan of the implant prosthesis.
