Accuracy of 3D digital modeling of dental arches

Favero, Riccardo; Volpato, Andrea; Francesco, Maurizio De; Fiore, Adolfo Di; Guazzo, Riccardo; Favero, Lorenzo

doi:10.1590/2177-6709.24.1.38.e1-7.onl

Cited by 26 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, the precision of the IOS was the lowest among the studied scanners, with a mean (SD) deviation of 0.23 (0.18) mm and a median (IQR) deviation of 0.18 (0.1–0.31) mm. This is also in line with literature reports; the authors of these reports still consider this an acceptable margin of deviation, and recommend the use of this scanner for clinical applications [ 17 , 19 , 24 , 25 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 ]. The higher deviations reported in our mandibular models are not in agreement with what was reported in the majority of the published studies, in which maxillary models showed higher deviations.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Comparative Evaluation of Digitization of Diagnostic Dental Cast (Plaster) Models Using Different Scanning Technologies

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapidly developing digital dental technologies have substantially simplified the documentation of plaster dental models. The large variety of available scanners with varying degrees of accuracy and cost, however, makes the purchase decision difficult. This study assessed the digitization accuracy of a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and an intraoral scanner (IOS), as compared to a desktop optical scanner (OS). Ten plaster dental models were digitized three times (n = 30) with each scanner. The generated STL files were cross-compared, and the RMS values were calculated. Conclusions were drawn about the accuracy with respect to precision and trueness levels. The precision of the CBCT scanner was similar to the desktop OS reference, which both had a median deviation of 0.04 mm. The IOS had statistically significantly higher deviation compared to the reference OS, with a median deviation of 0.18 mm. The trueness values of the CBCT was also better than that of IOS—median differences of 0.14 and 0.17 mm, respectively. We conclude that the tested CBCT scanner is a highly accurate and user-friendly scanner for model digitization, and therefore a valuable alternative to the OS. The tested IOS was generally of lower accuracy, but it can still be used for plaster dental model digitization.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Comparative Evaluation of Digitization of Diagnostic Dental Cast (Plaster) Models Using Different Scanning Technologies

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, Lim et al reported a different range of deviation according to type of intraoral scanner, with the Trios showing greater precision (mean error, 52.3 μm) compared to iTero (60.5 μm) in 10 repeated patient oral cavity scans [23]. Some studies found that image errors seemed to result from various factors such as type of scanner, performer's experience, existence of crowding, and scanning technique [23][24][25][26]. In our study, the surface error range of repeated IOS images is similar to or slightly larger than those of previous studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of intraoral scan images in full arch with orthodontic brackets: a retrospective in vivo study

Kim

Choi

et al. 2021

Clin Oral Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the accuracy of intraoral scan (IOS) images in the maxillary and mandibular arches with orthodontic brackets. Material and methods From digital impressions of 140 patients who underwent orthodontic treatment, consecutive IOS images were selected based on standardized inclusion criteria: Two pre-orthodontic IOS images (IOS1 and IOS2) of permanent dentition with fully erupted second molars and IOS images obtained immediately after orthodontic bracket bonding (IOSb). Superimpositions were performed to evaluate the reproducibility of repeated IOS images. Accuracy of IOSb images was analyzed by comparing the average surface errors between IOS1c and IOS2c images, which were IOS images cut based on the same region of the interest as between IOS1 and IOSb images. Results A total of 84 IOS images was analyzed. The average surface errors between IOS1 and IOS2 images were 57 ± 8 μm and 59 ± 14 μm in the maxillary and mandibular arch, respectively, and their reliability was almost perfect. The average errors between IOSb and IOS1c images exhibited an increase, which measured 97 ± 28 μm in the maxillary arch and 95 ± 29 μm in the mandibular arch. These surface deviations between IOSb and IOS1c images were significantly larger in each region as well as entire dentition (P < 0.001) compared to those between IOS1c and IOS2c images. Conclusions The average surface errors of the scans with brackets showed increased values compared with those without brackets. This suggests that orthodontic brackets could affect the trueness of intraoral scan images. Clinical relevance It is necessary for clinicians to consider the effect of brackets on digital impression when using IOS images in orthodontic patients.

show abstract

“…[6,[14][15][16][17] Thus, direct intraoral scanning is an important tool for obtaining study models and analysis of dental measurements for children and young patients, since satisfaction with this method has already been shown to be higher in adults [18] and children. [10] However, more studies are still needed, especially clinical ones, since most studies in the literature analyze the accuracy of this method in resin models [13,17] so that it can be used in the same way as models obtained via conventional molding without harming future clinical conducts.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Study of Concordance of Digital Models, Plaster Models, and 3D Printed Filament Models with Clinical Measurements in Children

Rosin¹,

Daltoé²,

Pucinelli³

et al. 2020

J Pediatr Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The present study aimed to evaluate, in pediatric patients, the concordance of intraoral scanner for dental measurements, comparing the measurements obtained clinically with digital models, 3D printed filament models, and conventional plaster models. Materials and Methods: For this study, 31 patients with mixed dentition were selected, with at least the upper central incisors and upper first permanent molars erupted. The dental size measurement obtained with 3Shape Trios Scanner was compared with that obtained clinically with the aid of a digital caliper, as well as the measurements made with plaster models and filament printed models. For data analysis, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was performed and the agreement was categorized according to it. The Bland–Altman analysis was also applied to the data to graphically display the concordance. Results: There was no difference in agreement between measurements made in plaster and filament models compared to the reference method, and for measurements in the digital model, the agreement was low or zero in the molar region. Conclusion: According to the present study, we can conclude that both plaster and filament models presented values that are faithful to those obtained clinically and that the evaluated region affected the agreement with the reference method.

show abstract

Accuracy of 3D digital modeling of dental arches

Cited by 26 publications

References 20 publications

Comparative Evaluation of Digitization of Diagnostic Dental Cast (Plaster) Models Using Different Scanning Technologies

Comparative Evaluation of Digitization of Diagnostic Dental Cast (Plaster) Models Using Different Scanning Technologies

Accuracy of intraoral scan images in full arch with orthodontic brackets: a retrospective in vivo study

Comparative Study of Concordance of Digital Models, Plaster Models, and 3D Printed Filament Models with Clinical Measurements in Children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About