14 January 2025 : Laboratory Research
Comparative Evaluation of the Dimensional Accuracy of Silicone-Based Putty Reline Impressions with Different Spacer Acquisition Techniques in Fixed Partial Dentures
Abdulelah Sameer Sindi
ACDEG 1, Hanan Salem A. Otudi BCDEF 2, Asma Ahmed A. Muslihi BEFG 2, Roaa Abdu Althurwi BEFG 2, Mohammed E. Sayed BCEF 3, Bandar M.A. Al-Makramani BCDE 3, Fuad A. Al-Sanabani ACDE 3, Mohammad Abker Ahmed Ageel BEF 3, Sultan A.Y. Jawbahi BEF 3, Lakshya Kumar AEFG 4, Saeed Awod Bin Hassan ACDE 1, Ahmed Abdullah Al Malwi ACDE 1, Sultan Mohammed Kaleem ACDEG 5, Khurshid Mattoo ABDEG 3*
DOI: 10.12659/MSM.946537
Med Sci Monit 2025; 31:e946537
Table 2 Comparative differences in mean values for various coordinates: angles (line/point), surfaces (curved/flat)] among different putty reline technique groups in a short-span fixed partial denture situation.
| Parameter | Coordinate | Group C | Group PP | Group GP | Group PS | Group CT | Group MT | One-way ANOVA test | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean±SD (n=12) | Mean±SD | Mean±SD | Mean±SD | Mean±SD | Mean±SD | F statistic | P value | |||
| Angle | Point | P1–P5 | 15.65±0.068 | 15.72±0.361 | 15.73±0.401 | 15.70±0.724 | 15.59±0.241 | 15.71±0.269 | 0.1845 | 0.9673 |
| P1–P2# | 2.15±0.066 | 2.16±0.297 | 2.26±0.383 | 2.39±0.499 | 2.36±0.368 | 2.33±0.341 | 0.8622 | 0.5125 | ||
| P1–P4# | 13.57±0.059 | 13.15±0.358 | 13.19±0.411 | 13.39±0.304 | 13.47±0.409 | 13.46±0.585 | 1.8443 | 0.124 | ||
| P1–P6# | 16.27±0.023 | 16.69±0.466 | 16.64±0.318 | 16.11±0.301 | 16.66±0.537 | 16.08±0.123 | 6.8996 | 0.0000* | ||
| P2–P3# | 15.58±0.031 | 13.82±0.864 | 13.22±0.649 | 15.17±0.477 | 14.88±0.443 | 15.01±0.556 | 12.140 | 0.0000* | ||
| P2–P5# | 15.32±0.050 | 15.75±0.483 | 15.64±0.091 | 15.60±0.681 | 15.83±0.284 | 15.75±0.216 | 2.3357 | 0.0542 | ||
| Line | L1–L4 | 13.71±0.056 | 13.45±0.377 | 13.40±0.372 | 13.75±0.627 | 13.62±0.358 | 13.57±0.181 | 1.4156 | 0.2334 | |
| L1–L5 | 18.86±0.080 | 19.22±0.351 | 19.34±0.269 | 19.20±0.530 | 19.12±0.463 | 18.94±0.306 | 2.4745 | 0.0433* | ||
| L3–L4 | 9.72±0.049 | 9.33±0.320 | 9.35±0.216 | 9.31±0.341 | 9.48±0.299 | 9.05±0.745 | 3.2088 | 0.0131* | ||
| L4–L5 | 5.90±0.052 | 5.87±0.496 | 5.82±0.439 | 5.76±0.363 | 5.79±0.463 | 5.69±0.284 | 0.4038 | 0.8441 | ||
| L1–L6# | 19.71±0.040 | 20.61±0.649 | 20.60±0.552 | 20.27±0.349 | 20.38±0.605 | 20.24±0.243 | 5.2115 | 0.0005* | ||
| L2–L5# | 19.26±0.084 | 19.80±0.960 | 19.82±0.876 | 19.79±0.887 | 19.78±0.910 | 19.57±0.469 | 0.8299 | 0.534 | ||
| Surface | Curved | C1–C3 | 13.48±0.044 | 13.54±0.364 | 13.66±0.542 | 13.50±0.536 | 13.55±0.404 | 13.62±0.383 | 0.2832 | 0.9203 |
| C1–C2# | 7.24±0.059 | 7.28±0.212 | 7.12±0.286 | 7.29±0.282 | 7.28±0.179 | 7.20±0.370 | 0.7158 | 0.6143 | ||
| C1–C4# | 17.76±0.116 | 18.02±0.460 | 18.03±0.503 | 17.69±0.180 | 17.83±0.357 | 17.75±0.228 | 1.8612 | 0.1165 | ||
| Flat (IAD) | F1–F3 | 12.74±0.051 | 12.85±0.318 | 12.91±0.357 | 12.70±0.238 | 12.81±0.412 | 12.56±0.464 | 1.407 | 0.2365 | |
| F1–F4 | 19.35±0.057 | 19.73±0.313 | 19.86±0.198 | 19.44±0.539 | 19.84±0.235 | 19.72±0.180 | 5.2592 | 0.0005* | ||
| F2–F3 | 9.18±0.052 | 8.76±0.406 | 8.74±0.671 | 9.21±0.487 | 8.86±0.779 | 9.03±0.699 | 1.2992 | 0.278 | ||
| C – control (master model); PP – pre preparation putty; GP – gouging putty (post preparation putty); PS – polythene spacer; CT – conventional temporary; MT – modified temporary; ANOVA – analysis of variance; SD – standard deviation; IAD – interabutment distance. Point angles: P1 (mesiobuccal distobuccal occlusal), P2 (mesiopalatal distopalatal occlusal), P3 (mesiobuccal occlusal), P4 (mesiopalatal occlusal), P5 (distobuccal occlusal), P6 (distopalatal occlusal); line angles: L1, L4 (mesiobuccal), L2 (mesiopalatal), L3, L5 (distobuccal), L6 (distopalatal); curved surface: C1, C3 (center of buccal), C2, C4 (center of palatal); flat surface: F1, F3 (center of mesial), F2, F4 (center of distal). * Denotes statistically significant differences between 2 groups at the value of # denotes coordinates of contralateral sides. | ||||||||||