Accuracy of three-dimensional printed models derived from cone-beam computed tomography.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Joshua M Ferraro, Jacob Falter, Sanghee Lee, Keiichiro Watanabe, Tai-Hsien Wu, Do-Gyoon Kim, Ching-Chang Ko, Eiji Tanaka, Toru Deguchi
{"title":"Accuracy of three-dimensional printed models derived from cone-beam computed tomography.","authors":"Joshua M Ferraro,&nbsp;Jacob Falter,&nbsp;Sanghee Lee,&nbsp;Keiichiro Watanabe,&nbsp;Tai-Hsien Wu,&nbsp;Do-Gyoon Kim,&nbsp;Ching-Chang Ko,&nbsp;Eiji Tanaka,&nbsp;Toru Deguchi","doi":"10.2319/021122-128.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the accuracy of three-dimensional (3D) printed models fabricated from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans of human mandibular dry skulls in comparison with models derived from intraoral scanner (IOS) data.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Six human mandibular dry skulls were scanned by IOS and CBCT. Digital models (DMs) constructed from the IOS and CBCT data were fabricated physically using a 3D printer. The width and thickness of individual teeth and intercanine and molar widths were measured using a digital caliper. The accuracy of the DMs was compared between IOS and CBCT. Paired t-tests were used for intergroup comparisons.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All intraclass correlation coefficient values for the three measurements (mesial-distal, buccal-lingual, width) exceeded 0.9. For the mandibular teeth, there were significant discrepancies in model accuracy between the IOS (average discrepancies of 0.18 ± 0.08 mm and 0.16 ± 0.12 mm for width and thickness, respectively) and CBCT (0.28 ± 0.07 mm for width, 0.37 ± 0.2 mm for thickness; P &lt; .01). Intercanine (P = .38) and molar widths (P = .41) showed no significant difference between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was a statistically significant difference in the accuracy of DMs obtained from CBCT and IOS; however, this did not seem to result in any important clinical difference. CBCT could be routinely used as an orthodontic diagnostic tool and for appliance construction.</p>","PeriodicalId":50790,"journal":{"name":"Angle Orthodontist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9598849/pdf/i1945-7103-92-6-722.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Angle Orthodontist","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2319/021122-128.1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Objectives: To determine the accuracy of three-dimensional (3D) printed models fabricated from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans of human mandibular dry skulls in comparison with models derived from intraoral scanner (IOS) data.

Materials and methods: Six human mandibular dry skulls were scanned by IOS and CBCT. Digital models (DMs) constructed from the IOS and CBCT data were fabricated physically using a 3D printer. The width and thickness of individual teeth and intercanine and molar widths were measured using a digital caliper. The accuracy of the DMs was compared between IOS and CBCT. Paired t-tests were used for intergroup comparisons.

Results: All intraclass correlation coefficient values for the three measurements (mesial-distal, buccal-lingual, width) exceeded 0.9. For the mandibular teeth, there were significant discrepancies in model accuracy between the IOS (average discrepancies of 0.18 ± 0.08 mm and 0.16 ± 0.12 mm for width and thickness, respectively) and CBCT (0.28 ± 0.07 mm for width, 0.37 ± 0.2 mm for thickness; P < .01). Intercanine (P = .38) and molar widths (P = .41) showed no significant difference between groups.

Conclusions: There was a statistically significant difference in the accuracy of DMs obtained from CBCT and IOS; however, this did not seem to result in any important clinical difference. CBCT could be routinely used as an orthodontic diagnostic tool and for appliance construction.

锥束计算机断层扫描三维打印模型的精度。
目的:确定锥束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)制作的人类下颌骨干颅骨三维(3D)打印模型的准确性,并与口内扫描仪(IOS)数据模型进行比较。材料与方法:对6例人下颌骨干颅骨进行IOS和CBCT扫描。利用3D打印机物理制作基于IOS和CBCT数据的数字模型(dm)。使用数字卡尺测量单个牙齿的宽度和厚度以及齿间和臼齿的宽度。比较了IOS和CBCT对dm的准确性。组间比较采用配对t检验。结果:三个测量值(中-远端、颊-舌、宽度)的类内相关系数值均超过0.9。对于下颌骨,IOS与CBCT(宽度0.28±0.07 mm,厚度0.37±0.2 mm;宽度0.18±0.08 mm,厚度0.16±0.12 mm)的模型精度存在显著差异;P & lt;. 01)。齿间宽度(P = 0.38)和磨牙宽度(P = 0.41)组间差异无统计学意义。结论:CBCT与IOS获得的DMs准确性有统计学差异;然而,这似乎并没有导致任何重要的临床差异。CBCT可作为常规的正畸诊断工具和矫治器结构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Angle Orthodontist
Angle Orthodontist 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
95
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Angle Orthodontist is the official publication of the Edward H. Angle Society of Orthodontists and is published bimonthly in January, March, May, July, September and November by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation Inc. The Angle Orthodontist is the only major journal in orthodontics with a non-commercial, non-profit publisher -- The E. H. Angle Education and Research Foundation. We value our freedom to operate exclusively in the best interests of our readers and authors. Our website www.angle.org is completely free and open to all visitors.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信