{"title":"Evaluation of the Reliability of Facial Models Digitalized with Different Imaging Methods in Cleft Lip and Palate.","authors":"Hüseyin Budak, Hanife Nuray Yilmaz","doi":"10.1177/10556656251314264","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the reliability of different digitizing methods not only among themselves but also with direct measurements from facial plaster models of unoperated cleft babies.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Single-center retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The study consisted facial models of babies with unilateral (UCLP, n = 65) and bilateral (BCLP, n = 65) cleft lip and palate from the archives of the Department of Orthodontics, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey. Those models were digitized using Medit i600, iTero Element 2 (Align Technology), and E3 3Shape scanning devices. A digital caliper with a 0.03 precision (INSIZE Digital Caliper) was used for manual measurements on plaster models. 3Shape Ortho Analyzer software was used for digital measurements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All scanning methods were reliable and compatible with a rate of 90% or more compared to manual measurements. The E3 3Shape device showed the lowest deviations (UCLP, between 0.04 and 0.11 mm; BCLP, between 0.04 and 0.25 mm) from manual measurements. In the UCLP group, Medit i600 presented the highest deviation (0.15-0.58 mm) whereas Itero Element 2 showed the highest deviation in the BCLP group (0.16-0.46 mm). Although there were statistically significant differences in the deviations of digital measurements, the values were still within clinically acceptable limits.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Intraoral scanners were less reliable in topographic measurements, especially in cases with increased depth. Although the highest compatible results were found with E3 3Shape model scanner, iTero Element 2 and Medit i600 were promising and advisable for digitizing and archiving the plaster models of babies with cleft lip and palate.</p>","PeriodicalId":49220,"journal":{"name":"Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal","volume":" ","pages":"10556656251314264"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656251314264","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To compare the reliability of different digitizing methods not only among themselves but also with direct measurements from facial plaster models of unoperated cleft babies.
Design: Single-center retrospective study.
Setting: The study consisted facial models of babies with unilateral (UCLP, n = 65) and bilateral (BCLP, n = 65) cleft lip and palate from the archives of the Department of Orthodontics, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey. Those models were digitized using Medit i600, iTero Element 2 (Align Technology), and E3 3Shape scanning devices. A digital caliper with a 0.03 precision (INSIZE Digital Caliper) was used for manual measurements on plaster models. 3Shape Ortho Analyzer software was used for digital measurements.
Results: All scanning methods were reliable and compatible with a rate of 90% or more compared to manual measurements. The E3 3Shape device showed the lowest deviations (UCLP, between 0.04 and 0.11 mm; BCLP, between 0.04 and 0.25 mm) from manual measurements. In the UCLP group, Medit i600 presented the highest deviation (0.15-0.58 mm) whereas Itero Element 2 showed the highest deviation in the BCLP group (0.16-0.46 mm). Although there were statistically significant differences in the deviations of digital measurements, the values were still within clinically acceptable limits.
Conclusion: Intraoral scanners were less reliable in topographic measurements, especially in cases with increased depth. Although the highest compatible results were found with E3 3Shape model scanner, iTero Element 2 and Medit i600 were promising and advisable for digitizing and archiving the plaster models of babies with cleft lip and palate.
期刊介绍:
The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal (CPCJ) is the premiere peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary, international journal dedicated to current research on etiology, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment in all areas pertaining to craniofacial anomalies. CPCJ reports on basic science and clinical research aimed at better elucidating the pathogenesis, pathology, and optimal methods of treatment of cleft and craniofacial anomalies. The journal strives to foster communication and cooperation among professionals from all specialties.