.jpg?format=webp&width=780)
Maxillary defects can make prosthetic rehabilitation challenging, requiring accurate impressions for successful treatment. This study developed conventional and 3D-printed maxillary defect models to compare digital and traditional impression techniques. A central palatal defect model was used to evaluate dimensional accuracy and total time. Digital impressions produced statistically different results in terms of defect size measurements and took significantly less time to record compared to traditional impressions. However, there was no significant difference in the total time taken to fabricate a maxillary central defect model. These models have the potential for comparing conventional and digital workflows in prosthetic treatment procedures.
Like
Save
Share