Traditional, 2D and 3D Workflows: What Is Better for Aesthetic Rehabilitation of Superior Anterior Teeth?

Abstract

This study aimed to compare conventional, digital 2D and digital 3D workflows as possible aesthetic rehabilitation processes for the maxillary anterior area using “open-source” software. For the conventional workflow, a diagnostic wax-up was produced by a dental technician. For the 2D digital workflow, Keynote software (version 11.1) was used to perform digital aesthetic analysis and smile planning. Measurements were taken and used by the technician to obtain a dental wax-up. For the 3D session, a plaster model was scanned and used to perform 3D analysis and the guide for the mock-up was digitally printed. Symmetry and aesthetic parameters were assessed for each mock-up, and the opinion of dental professionals and laypeople about the aesthetic outcome of three mockups was assessed by an anonymous questionnaire. The 2D mock-up received the highest score, and this mock-up was found to be the most symmetrical, even though it had the longest operating times. There was a statistically significant difference (p = 0.000) between the scores given to this picture: experts in the dental field gave lower scores compared with non-professionals. Digital planning of aesthetic rehabilitation represents a technologically innovative procedure in dental practice, making it possible to achieve excellent aesthetic results, even when using open-source software.