Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Accuracy and eligibility of CBCT to digitize dental plaster casts

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

Software-based dental planning requires digital casts and oftentimes cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) radiography. However, buying a dedicated model digitizing device can be expensive and might not be required. The present study aimed to assess whether digital models derived from CBCT and models digitized using a dedicated optical device are of comparable accuracy.

Material and methods

A total of 20 plaster casts were digitized with eight CBCT and five optical model digitizers. Corresponding models were superimposed using six control points and subsequent iterative closest point matching. Median distances were calculated among all registered models. Data were pooled per scanner and model. Boxplots were generated, and the paired t test, a Friedman test, and a post-hoc Nemenyi test were employed for statistical comparison. Results were found significant at p < 0.05.

Results

All CBCT devices allowed the digitization of plaster casts, but failed to reach the accuracy of the dedicated model digitizers (p < 0.001). Median distances between CBCT and optically digitized casts were 0.064 + − 0.005 mm. Qualitative differences among the CBCT systems were detected (χ 2 = 78.07, p < 0.001), and one CBCT providing a special plaster cast digitization mode was found superior to the competitors (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

CBCT systems failed to reach the accuracy from optical digitizers, but within the limits of the study, accuracy appeared to be sufficient for digital planning and forensic purposes.

Clinical relevance

Most CBCT systems enabled digitization of plaster casts, and accuracy was found sufficient for digital planning and storage purposes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. De Luca Canto G, Pacheco-Pereira C, Lagravere MO, Flores-Mir C, Major PW (2015) Intra-arch dimensional measurement validity of laser-scanned digital dental models compared with the original plaster models: a systematic review. Orthod Craniofac Res 18(2):65–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12068

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Abizadeh N, Moles DR, O'Neill J, Noar JH (2012) Digital versus plaster study models: how accurate and reproducible are they? J Orthod 39(3):151–159. https://doi.org/10.1179/1465312512z.00000000023

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. McGuinness NJ, Stephens CD (1992) Storage of orthodontic study models in hospital units in the U.K. Br J Orthod 19(3):227–232. https://doi.org/10.1179/bjo.19.3.227

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gonzalez de Villaumbrosia P, Martinez-Rus F, Garcia-Orejas A, Salido MP, Pradies G (2016) In vitro comparison of the accuracy (trueness and precision) of six extraoral dental scanners with different scanning technologies. J Prosthet Dent 116:543–550.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.01.025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Mandelli F, Gherlone E, Gastaldi G, Ferrari M (2016) Evaluation of the accuracy of extraoral laboratory scanners with a single-tooth abutment model: a 3D analysis. J Prosthod Res 61(4):363–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2016.09.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Patzelt SB, Emmanouilidi A, Stampf S, Strub JR, Att W (2014) Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral scanners. Clin Oral Investig 18(6):1687–1694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-1132-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Widmann G, Bale RJ (2006) Accuracy in computer-aided implant surgery—a review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 21(2):305–313

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Behneke A, Burwinkel M, Knierim K, Behneke N (2012) Accuracy assessment of cone beam computed tomography-derived laboratory-based surgical templates on partially edentulous patients. Clin Oral Implants Res 23(2):137–143. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02176.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Vermeulen J (2016) The accuracy of implant placement by experienced surgeons: guided vs freehand approach in a simulated plastic model. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 10.11607/jomi.5065

  10. Van Assche N, Vercruyssen M, Coucke W, Teughels W, Jacobs R, Quirynen M (2012) Accuracy of computer-aided implant placement. Clin Oral Implants Res 23:112–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02552.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jung RE, Schneider D, Ganeles J, Wismeijer D, Zwahlen M, Hammerle CH, Tahmaseb A (2009) Computer technology applications in surgical implant dentistry: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 24(Suppl):92–109

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Martorelli M, Gerbino S, Giudice M, Ausiello P (2013) A comparison between customized clear and removable orthodontic appliances manufactured using RP and CNC techniques. Dent Mater 29(2):e1–e10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.10.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Saxe AK, Louie LJ, Mah J (2010) Efficiency and effectiveness of SureSmile. World J Orthod 11(1):16–22

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sachdeva RC, Aranha SL, Egan ME, Gross HT, Sachdeva NS, Currier GF, Kadioglu O (2012) Treatment time: SureSmile vs conventional. Orthodontics 13(1):72–85

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Segal GR, Schiffman PH, Tuncay OC (2004) Meta analysis of the treatment-related factors of external apical root resorption. Orthod Craniofac Res 7(2):71–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-6343.2004.00286.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Maino BG, Paoletto E, Lombardo L 3rd, Siciliani G (2016) A three-dimensional digital insertion guide for palatal miniscrew placement. J Clin Orthod 50(1):12–22

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Barreto MS, Faber J, Vogel CJ, Araujo TM (2016) Reliability of digital orthodontic setups. Angle Orthod 86(2):255–259. https://doi.org/10.2319/120914-890.1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Choi DS, Jeong YM, Jang I, Jost-Brinkmann PG, Cha BK (2010) Accuracy and reliability of palatal superimposition of three-dimensional digital models. Angle Orthod 80(4):497–503. https://doi.org/10.2319/101309-569.1

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Krieger E, Seiferth J, Saric I, Jung BA, Wehrbein H (2011) Accuracy of Invisalign(R) treatments in the anterior tooth region. First results. J Orofac Orthop 72(2):141–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-011-0017-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Poleti ML, Fernandes TM, Pagin O, Moretti MR, Rubira-Bullen IR (2016) Analysis of linear measurements on 3D surface models using CBCT data segmentation obtained by automatic standard pre-set thresholds in two segmentation software programs: an in vitro study. Clin Oral Investig 20(1):179–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1485-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kang S-H, Kim Y-H, Kim M-K (2016) Comparison of digital dental images yielded by digital dental casts, cone-beam computed tomography, and multislice computed tomography for measurement of dental area. Oral Radiol 33(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11282-016-0242-z

    Google Scholar 

  22. Core Team R (2016) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna https://www.R-project.org/

    Google Scholar 

  23. Reuschl RP, Heuer W, Stiesch M, Wenzel D, Dittmer MP (2016) Reliability and validity of measurements on digital study models and plaster models. Eur J Orthod 38(1):22–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjv001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ashmore JL, Kurland BF, King GJ, Wheeler TT, Ghafari J, Ramsay DS (2002) A 3-dimensional analysis of molar movement during headgear treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 121(1):18–29; discussion 29-30. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2002.120687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Becker K, Wilmes B, Grandjean C, Drescher D (2017) Impact of manual control point selection accuracy on automated surface matching of digital dental models. Clin Oral Investig. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2155-6

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthodontics, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Moorenstr. 5, Geb. 18.21, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany

    Kathrin Becker & Dieter Drescher

  2. Steinbeis Hochschule Berlin and Private Practice, Frankfurt, Germany

    Ulf Schmücker

  3. Department of Oral Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany

    Frank Schwarz

Authors
  1. Kathrin Becker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ulf Schmücker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Frank Schwarz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dieter Drescher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathrin Becker.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Becker, K., Schmücker, U., Schwarz, F. et al. Accuracy and eligibility of CBCT to digitize dental plaster casts. Clin Oral Invest 22, 1817–1823 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2277-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-017-2277-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation