Novel Method for Superposing 3D Digital Models for Monitoring Orthodontic Tooth Movement
- 194 Downloads
Quantitative three-dimensional analysis of orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) is possible by superposition of digital jaw models made at different times during treatment. Conventional methods rely on surface alignment at palatal soft-tissue areas, which is applicable to the maxilla only. We introduce two novel numerical methods applicable to both maxilla and mandible. The OTM from the initial phase of multi-bracket appliance treatment of ten pairs of maxillary models were evaluated and compared with four conventional methods. The median range of deviation of OTM for three users was 13–72% smaller for the novel methods than for the conventional methods, indicating greater inter-observer agreement. Total tooth translation and rotation were significantly different (ANOVA, p < 0.01) for OTM determined by use of the two numerical and four conventional methods. Directional decomposition of OTM from the novel methods showed clinically acceptable agreement with reference results except for vertical translations (deviations of medians greater than 0.6 mm). The difference in vertical translational OTM can be explained by maxillary vertical growth during the observation period, which is additionally recorded by conventional methods. The novel approaches are, thus, particularly suitable for evaluation of pure treatment effects, because growth-related changes are ignored.
KeywordsOrthodontic treatment Tooth movement Superimposition Digital dental study models Registration
We thank Ian Davies, copy-editor, for English language revision.
Conflict of interest
We declare that this article is free from conflicts of interest.
- 3.Aragón, M. L. C., L. F. Pontes, L. M. Bichara, C. Flores-Mir, and D. Normando. Validity and reliability of intraoral scanners compared to conventional gypsum models measurements: a systematic review. Eur. J. Orthod. 38(4):429–434, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjw033.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Bro-Nielsen, M., C. Gramkow, and S. Kreiborg. Non-rigid image registration using bone growth model. In: CVRMed-MRCAS’97, edited by J. Troccaz, E. Grimson, and R. Mösges. Berlin: Springer, 1997, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
- 11.Burstone, C. J. The biomechanics of tooth movement. In: Vistas in Orthodontics: Presented to Alton W. Moore, edited by B. S. Kraus, and R. A. Riedel. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1962, pp. 197–213.Google Scholar
- 14.Chen, G., S. Chen, X. Y. Zhang, R. P. Jiang, Y. Liu, F. H. Shi, and T. M. Xu. Stable region for maxillary dental cast superimposition in adults, studied with the aid of stable miniscrews. Orthod. Craniofac. Res. 14(2):70–79, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-6343.2011.01510.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Choi, J.-I., B.-K. Cha, P.-G. Jost-Brinkmann, D.-S. Choi, and I.-S. Jang. Validity of palatal superimposition of 3-dimensional digital models in cases treated with rapid maxillary expansion and maxillary protraction headgear. Korean J. Orthod. 42(5):235–241, 2012. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2012.42.5.235.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 24.Han, L., J. H. Hipwell, B. Eiben, D. Barratt, M. Modat, S. Ourselin, and D. J. Hawkes. A nonlinear biomechanical model based registration method for aligning prone and supine MR breast images. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 33(3):682–694, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2013.2294539.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 25.Hayashi, K., J. Uechi, M. Murata, and I. Mizoguchi. Comparison of maxillary canine retraction with sliding mechanics and a retraction spring: a three-dimensional analysis based on a midpalatal orthodontic implant. Eur. J. Orthod. 26(6):585–589, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/26.6.585.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 35.Nalcaci, R., A. B. Kocoglu-Altan, A. A. Bicakci, F. Ozturk, and H. Babacan. A reliable method for evaluating upper molar distalization: superimposition of three-dimensional digital models. Korean J. Orthod. 45(2):82–88, 2015. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2015.45.2.82.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 37.Osipenko, M. A., M. Y. Nyashin, and Y. I. Nyashin. Center of resistance and center of rotation of a tooth: the definitions, conditions of existence, properties. Russ. J. Biomech. 1999(1):5–15, 1999.Google Scholar
- 41.Ricketts, R. M. Bioprogressive Therapy (2nd ed.). Denver: Rocky Mountain Orthodontics, p. 457, 1984.Google Scholar
- 42.Schroeder, H. E. The Periodontium. Handbook of Microscopic Anatomy, Vol. 5/5. Berlin: Springer, 1986.Google Scholar
- 43.Schumacher, G.-H. (ed.). Anatomie und Biochemie der Zähne (3rd ed.). Berlin: Verl. Volk und Gesundheit, 1983.Google Scholar
- 45.Storey, E., and R. Smith. Force in orthodontics and its relation to tooth movement. Aust. J. Dent. 56(1):11–18, 1952.Google Scholar
- 48.Tong, H., D. Kwon, J. Shi, N. Sakai, R. Enciso, and G. T. Sameshima. Mesiodistal angulation and faciolingual inclination of each whole tooth in 3-dimensional space in patients with near-normal occlusion. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 141(5):604–617, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.12.018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 49.van Leeuwen, E. J., A. M. Kuijpers-Jagtman, J. W. von den Hoff, F. A. D. T. G. Wagener, and J. C. Maltha. Rate of orthodontic tooth movement after changing the force magnitude: an experimental study in beagle dogs. Orthod. Craniofac. Res. 13(4):238–245, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-6343.2010.01500.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar