Back
 OJST  Vol.10 No.8 , August 2020
Digital Models: Comparison of Scanning Angulations and Superimposition
Abstract: Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate linear measurements in digital models, scanned at different angulations, in order to compare four methods of superimposing digital models. Methods: Dental models obtained from the database of the School of Health and Life Sciences of the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS) were scanned three-dimensionally at different angulations (0°, 5°, 10° and 15° in relation to the occlusal plane) and divided in four groups. The sample size was calculated and 43 dental models were used in this study. Linear measurements were obtained to assess the central and lateral portions of the 3D models, so that any possible distortion would be detected. Additionally, the digital models were superimposed using four approaches based on anatomical references: Methods 1 (three central landmarks), 2 (three lateral landmarks), 3 (surface + single landmark) and 4 (surface + three landmarks). Intraclass correlation coefficient was applied to evaluate the intra-observer reliability. Kruskal-Wallis was calculated to compare the groups according to the angulation during scanning, and Kappa to evaluate the agreement between superimposition methods. Results: No differences were found in models scanned at different angulations. Better superimposition correlation was observed between methods 3 and 4 those used techniques based on palatal surface associated to anatomical landmarks to superimpose. Conclusions: Linear measurements and superimpositions were not affected by the different angulations of the models during the scanning process. The most reliable superimposition methods were the ones using surface and landmarks.
Cite this paper: Barbo, B. , Azeredo, F. and Menezes, L. (2020) Digital Models: Comparison of Scanning Angulations and Superimposition. Open Journal of Stomatology, 10, 218-229. doi: 10.4236/ojst.2020.108021.
References

[1]   Horton, H.M.I., Miller, J.R., Gaillard, P.R. and Larson, B.E. (2010) Technique Comparison for Efficient Orthodontic Tooth Measurements Using Digital Models. The Angle Orthodontist, 80, 254-261.
https://doi.org/10.2319/041709-219.1

[2]   Lippold, C., Kirschneck, C., Schreiber, K., et al. (2015) Methodological Accuracy of Digital and Manual Model Analysis in Orthodontics—A Retrospective Clinical Study. Computers in Biology and Medicine, 62, 103-109.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2015.04.012

[3]   Abizadeh, N., Moles, D.R., O’Neill, J. and Noar, J.H. (2012) Digital versus Plaster Study Models: How Accurate and Reproducible Are They? Journal of Orthodontics, 39, 151-159.
https://doi.org/10.1179/1465312512Z.00000000023

[4]   Leifert, M.F., Leifert, M.M., Efstratiadis, S.S. and Cangialosi, T.J. (2009) Comparison of Space Analysis Evaluations with Digital Models and Plaster Dental Casts. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 136, 16.e1-16.e4.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.11.019

[5]   Sousa, M.V.S., Vasconcelos, E.C., Janson, G., Garib, D. and Pinzan, A. (2012) Accuracy and Reproducibility of 3-Dimensional Digital Model Measurements. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 142, 269-273.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.12.028

[6]   Rheude, B., Sadowsky, P.L., Ferriera, A. and Jacobson, A. (2005) An Evaluation of the Use of Digital Study Models in Orthodontic Diagnosis and Treatment Planning. The Angle Orthodontist, 75, 300-304.

[7]   Whetten, J.L., Williamson, P.C., Heo, G., Varnhagen, C. and Major, P.W. (2006) Variations in Orthodontic Treatment Planning Decisions of Class II Patients between Virtual 3-Dimensional Models and Traditional Plaster Study Models. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 130, 485-491.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.02.022

[8]   Pachêco-Pereira, C., de Luca Canto, G., Major, P.W. and Flores-Mir, C. (2015) Variation of Orthodontic Treatment Decision-Making Based on Dental Model Type: A Systematic Review. The Angle Orthodontist, 85, 501-509.
https://doi.org/10.2319/051214-343.1

[9]   Kim, J. and Lagravére, M.O. (2016) Accuracy of Bolton Analysis Measured in Laser Scanned Digital Models Compared with Plaster Models (Gold Standard) and Cone-Beam Computer Tomography Images. Korean Journal of Orthodontics, 46, 13-19.
https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2016.46.1.13

[10]   Akyalcin, S., Dyer, D.J., English, J.D. and Sar, C. (2013) Comparison of 3-Dimensional Dental Models from Different Sources: Diagnostic Accuracy and Surface Registration Analysis. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 144, 831-837.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.08.014

[11]   Chen, G., Chen, S., Zhang, X., et al. (2011) Stable Region for Maxillary Dental Cast Superimposition in Adults, Studied with the Aid of Stable Miniscrews. Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research, 14, 70-79.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-6343.2011.01510.x

[12]   Choi, J.-I., Cha, B.-K., Jost-Brinkmannm, P.-G., Choim, D.-S. and Jangm, I.-S. (2012) Validity of Palatal Superimposition of 3-Dimensional Digital Models in Cases Treated with Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Maxillary Protraction Headgear. Korean Journal of Orthodontics, 42, 235-241.
https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2012.42.5.235

[13]   Nalcaci, R., Kocoglu-Altan, A.B., Bicakci, A.A., Ozturk, F. and Babacan, H. (2015) A Reliable Method for Evaluating Upper Molar Distalization: Superimposition of Three-Dimensional Digital Models. Korean Journal of Orthodontics, 45, 82-88.
https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2015.45.2.82

[14]   Elnagar, M.H., Elshourbagy, E., Ghobashy, S., Khedr, M. and Evans, C.A. (2017) Dentoalveolar and Arch Dimension Changes in Patients Treated with Miniplate-Anchored Maxillary Protraction. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 151, 1092-1106.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.10.038

[15]   Jang, I., Tanaka, M., Koga, Y., et al. (2009) A Novel Method for the Assessment of Three-Dimensional Tooth Movement during Orthodontic Treatment. The Angle Orthodontics, 79, 447-453.
https://doi.org/10.2319/042308-225.1

[16]   Birgfeld, C.B., Saltzman, B.S., Luquetti, D.V., Latham, K., Starr, J.R. and Heike, C.L. (2013) Comparison of Two-Dimensional and Three-Dimensional Images for Phenotypic Assessment of Craniofacial Microsomia. The Cleft Palate and Craniofacial Journal, 50, 305-314.
https://doi.org/10.1597/11-173

[17]   Fleming, P., Marinho, V. and Johal, A. (2011) Orthodontic Measurements on Digital Study Models Compared with Plaster Models: A Systematic Review. Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research, 14, 1-16.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-6343.2010.01503.x

[18]   de Luca Canto, G., Pachêco-Pereira, C., Lagravere, M.O., Flores-Mir, C. and Major, P.W. (2015) Intra-Arch Dimensional Measurement Validity of Laser-Scanned Digital Dental Models Compared with the Original Plaster Models: A Systematic Review. Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research, 18, 65-76.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12068

[19]   Noh, H., Nabha, W., Cho, J.-H. and Hwang, H.-S. (2011) Registration Accuracy in the Integration of Laser-Scanned Dental Images into Maxillofacial Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Images. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 140, 585-591.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.04.018

[20]   Cha, B.K., Lee, J.Y., Jost-Brinkmann, P.-G. and Yoshida, N. (2007) Analysis of Tooth Movement in Extraction Cases Using Three-Dimensional Reverse Engineering Technology. European Journal of Orthodontics, 29, 325-331.
https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjm019

[21]   Garib, D., Miranda, F., Yatabe, M.S., et al. (2019) Superimposition of Maxillary Digital Models Using the Palatal Rugae: Does Ageing Affect the Reliability? Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research, 22, 183-193.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12309

 
 
Top