Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models

Santoro, Margherita; Galkin, Scott; Teredesai, Monica; Nicolay, Olivier; Cangialosi, Thomas J.

doi:10.1016/s0889-5406(03)00152-5

Cited by 268 publications

(242 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

195

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To relate the outcomes to the initial situations prior to orthodontic treatment, manual measurements were performed on the T1 and T0 casts , including intercanine distance [1,7,8,11] and overjet [7,25]. The treatment-related changes of these parameters were obtained by calculating the difference between T0 and T1.…”

Section: Determination Of Treatment-related Risk Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Post-treatment changes in permanent retention

Wolf

Schulte

Küpper³

et al. 2016

J Orofac Orthop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVES While permanent retention is today the method of choice to stabilize orthodontic treatment outcomes, recent studies have increasingly reported posttreatment changes in tooth position during permanent retention. We conducted this study to analyze changes in the anterior mandible, whether the changes follow an underlying movement pattern, and, aiming for a preventive strategy, whether any risk factors could be identified comparing findings with the pretreatment situations. METH-ODS We included 30 patients who had worn fixed Twistflex retainers (UK 3-3) extending from canine to canine in the mandible. Casts reflecting the intraoral situations before orthodontic treatment (T0), directly after completion of active therapy (T1), and 6 months later (T2) were scanned and superimposed using Imageware Surfacer software. Posttreatment changes (T2-T1) of tooth position within the retainer block were analyzed on 3D virtual models and were compared to pretreatment (T0) and treatment-related (T1-T0) findings to identify potential risk factors. RESULTS Almost all analyzed patients revealed three-dimensional changes in tooth position within the retainer block. Comparing these movements, we repeatedly found rotated retainer blocks in labio-oral direction, while the center of rotation was located at the first incisors. This pattern was associated with intercanine expansion and excessive overjet correction during orthodontic treatment. The canines underwent the most pronounced (rotational and translational) movements. CONCLUSIONS In general permanent lingual retainers are safe but in special clinical cases retainers can induce undesired tooth movement. Risk factors seem to be intercanine expansion and excessive overjet correction during orthodontic treatment. In specific cases an additional retention device might be needed. AbstractObjectives. While permanent retention is today frequently the method of choice to stabilize orthodontic treatment outcomes, recent studies have increasingly reported posttreatment changes in tooth position during permanent retention. We conducted this study to analyze such changes in the anterior mandible, whether these follow an underlying movement pattern, and, aiming for a preventive strategy, whether any risk factors could be identified by comparing findings to the pretreatment situations. Methods.We included 30 patients who had worn a fixed Twistflex retainer extending from canine to canine in the mandible. Casts reflecting the intraoral situations before orthodontic treatment (T0), directly upon completion of active therapy (T1), and 6 months into retention (T2) were scanned and superposed using Imageware Surfacer software. Posttreatment changes (T2−T1) in tooth position inside the retainer block were analyzed on 3D virtual models and were compared to pretreatment (T0) and treatment-related (T1−T0) findings to identify potential risk factors.Results. Almost all patients revealed three-dimensional changes in tooth position within the retainer block. On comparing these movements...

show abstract

Section: Determination Of Treatment-related Risk Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Post-treatment changes in permanent retention

Wolf

Schulte

Küpper³

et al. 2016

J Orofac Orthop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The overall conclusion of these studies is that digital models are acceptable alternatives to stone casts for the routine measurements used in orthodontic practice. [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34] On the other hand, no study has evaluated the possible time-dependent deformation of alginate impressions during their shipment to the companies involved.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Relationship between Digital Model Accuracy and Time-Dependent Deformation of Alginate Impressions

Alcan

Ceylanoğlu²,

Baysal³

2009

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To investigate the effects of different storage periods of alginate impressions on digital model accuracy. Materials and Methods: A total of 105 impressions were taken from a master model with three different brands of alginates and were poured into stone models in five different storage periods. In all, 21 stone models were poured and immediately were scanned, and 21 digital models were prepared. The remaining 84 impressions were poured after 1, 2, 3, and 4 days, respectively. Five linear measurements were made by three researchers on the master model, the stone models, and the digital models. Time-dependent deformation of alginate impressions at different storage periods and the accuracy of traditional stone models and digital models were evaluated separately. Results: Both the stone models and the digital models were highly correlated with the master model. Significant deformities in the alginate impressions were noted at different storage periods of 1 to 4 days. Alginate impressions of different brands also showed significant differences between each other on the first, third, and fourth days. Conclusions: Digital orthodontic models are as reliable as traditional stone models and probably will become the standard for orthodontic clinical use. Storing alginate impressions in sealed plastic bags for up to 4 days caused statistically significant deformation of alginate impressions, but the magnitude of these deformations did not appear to be clinically relevant and had no adverse effect on digital modeling. (Angle Orthod. 2009;79:30-36.)

show abstract

“…26,34 In particular, growth of the maxillary bone was assessed by measuring palatal surface area and palatal volume at each time point; this has previously been demonstrated to be a valid tool for assessing skeletal changes in the maxillary bone before and after treatment. 27,28,35 Of note, growth in length may be excluded in this study because the palatal vault was delimitated posteriorly by a plane passing through two points located at the distal aspects of the last erupted primary molars, even if first permanent molars were present in the oral cavity ( Figure 1B).…”

Section: Changes In the Palatal Vaultmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To overcome these problems, a laser scanner can be used to obtain three-dimensional (3D) images of study casts. 3D images of study casts can be used to measure linear dimensions, [23][24][25][26] palatal surface area, and palatal volume. [27][28][29] Given the poor available data on growth of the upper jaw in different dentition stages, the aim of the present study was to assess dimensional palatal vault changes in children on 3D digital images of study casts in primary dentition and mixed dentition stages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-dimensional longitudinal evaluation of palatal vault changes in growing subjects

Primožič¹,

Perinetti²,

Richmond³

et al. 2012

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate palatal vault change in children and to assess the reliability of two palatal parameters in assessing growth modifications. Subjects and Methods: A group of 26 healthy white children aged 5.3 6 0.3 years (15 boys, 11 girls) were randomly selected. Impressions of the upper dental arches were obtained at baseline and at 12, 18, and 30 months follow-up. Three-dimensional digital images of study casts were obtained using a laser scanning device. Palatal surface area and palatal volume were measured on the digital study casts at each time point. Effect size (ES) coefficients were calculated for both parameters as indices of diagnostic reliability in individual subjects when at least equal to 1.0. Results: Significant increases in palatal surface area and volume were seen over the observation period (P , .001). ES coefficients for palatal surface area were greater than those for palatal volume. However, even for the former parameter, only the value taken at 30 months was above the threshold. Conclusions: Growth of the palatal vault was significant during the observation period, which coincides with primary and mixed dentition stages. Palatal surface area appears to be more reliable than palatal volume in assessment of growth modifications in individual subjects. (Angle Orthod. 2012;82:632-636.)

show abstract

Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models

Cited by 268 publications

References 5 publications

Post-treatment changes in permanent retention

Post-treatment changes in permanent retention

The Relationship between Digital Model Accuracy and Time-Dependent Deformation of Alginate Impressions

Three-dimensional longitudinal evaluation of palatal vault changes in growing subjects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About