Christiane Keil, Michaela Buckova, Sheila Keil, Louis Hartmann, Wilhelm Schlupp, Thomas Zerjatke, Theodosia Bartzela, Günter Lauer
{"title":"口腔内扫描在婴儿唇腭裂手术前矫形治疗中的适用性:一项前瞻性非随机比较研究。","authors":"Christiane Keil, Michaela Buckova, Sheila Keil, Louis Hartmann, Wilhelm Schlupp, Thomas Zerjatke, Theodosia Bartzela, Günter Lauer","doi":"10.1007/s00784-025-06444-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This in vivo study evaluated the reliability of digital impressions from intraoral scans compared to digital scans of plaster casts of the edentulous maxilla of infants with cleft lip and palate (CLP).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>To compare and evaluate the dimensional accuracy of digital and conventional impressions, 52 infants with CLP were selected. Conventional plaster and digital impressions were taken from each patient before surgical closure of the lips and/or palate. Plaster casts were digitized using the intraoral scanner. Eight linear distances were measured and 3D superimpositions were performed. Pearson's correlation, mean difference and root mean square were calculated to compare the two impression methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Regardless of the form of CLP, the IOS and the plaster casts correlated very well. The measured linear dimensions of the IOS were greater than those of the digitized plaster casts. Although the linear measurements showed differences of up to 0.89 mm, superimpositions showed that the two impression methods did not differ in a clinically relevant way.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No clinically relevant difference in accuracy was found between IOS and the plaster casts. When investigating the accuracy, 3D analysis should always be preferred to 2D analysis.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>This study confirms that IOS is a reliable and clinical valuable alternative for infants with CLP. IOS eliminates risks associated with traditional methods, providing a safer and more efficient workflow for PSIO. Despite minor differences in dimensional accuracy, these variations are clinically negligible and do not impact treatment planning or appliance fabrication.</p>","PeriodicalId":10461,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Investigations","volume":"29 8","pages":"378"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12241132/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Applicability of intraoral scans for presurgical orthopedic treatment of cleft lip and palate in infants: a prospective non-randomized comparative study.\",\"authors\":\"Christiane Keil, Michaela Buckova, Sheila Keil, Louis Hartmann, Wilhelm Schlupp, Thomas Zerjatke, Theodosia Bartzela, Günter Lauer\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00784-025-06444-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This in vivo study evaluated the reliability of digital impressions from intraoral scans compared to digital scans of plaster casts of the edentulous maxilla of infants with cleft lip and palate (CLP).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>To compare and evaluate the dimensional accuracy of digital and conventional impressions, 52 infants with CLP were selected. Conventional plaster and digital impressions were taken from each patient before surgical closure of the lips and/or palate. Plaster casts were digitized using the intraoral scanner. Eight linear distances were measured and 3D superimpositions were performed. Pearson's correlation, mean difference and root mean square were calculated to compare the two impression methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Regardless of the form of CLP, the IOS and the plaster casts correlated very well. The measured linear dimensions of the IOS were greater than those of the digitized plaster casts. Although the linear measurements showed differences of up to 0.89 mm, superimpositions showed that the two impression methods did not differ in a clinically relevant way.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No clinically relevant difference in accuracy was found between IOS and the plaster casts. When investigating the accuracy, 3D analysis should always be preferred to 2D analysis.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>This study confirms that IOS is a reliable and clinical valuable alternative for infants with CLP. IOS eliminates risks associated with traditional methods, providing a safer and more efficient workflow for PSIO. Despite minor differences in dimensional accuracy, these variations are clinically negligible and do not impact treatment planning or appliance fabrication.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10461,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Oral Investigations\",\"volume\":\"29 8\",\"pages\":\"378\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12241132/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Oral Investigations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-025-06444-9\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Investigations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-025-06444-9","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}
Applicability of intraoral scans for presurgical orthopedic treatment of cleft lip and palate in infants: a prospective non-randomized comparative study.
Objectives: This in vivo study evaluated the reliability of digital impressions from intraoral scans compared to digital scans of plaster casts of the edentulous maxilla of infants with cleft lip and palate (CLP).
Materials and methods: To compare and evaluate the dimensional accuracy of digital and conventional impressions, 52 infants with CLP were selected. Conventional plaster and digital impressions were taken from each patient before surgical closure of the lips and/or palate. Plaster casts were digitized using the intraoral scanner. Eight linear distances were measured and 3D superimpositions were performed. Pearson's correlation, mean difference and root mean square were calculated to compare the two impression methods.
Results: Regardless of the form of CLP, the IOS and the plaster casts correlated very well. The measured linear dimensions of the IOS were greater than those of the digitized plaster casts. Although the linear measurements showed differences of up to 0.89 mm, superimpositions showed that the two impression methods did not differ in a clinically relevant way.
Conclusions: No clinically relevant difference in accuracy was found between IOS and the plaster casts. When investigating the accuracy, 3D analysis should always be preferred to 2D analysis.
Clinical relevance: This study confirms that IOS is a reliable and clinical valuable alternative for infants with CLP. IOS eliminates risks associated with traditional methods, providing a safer and more efficient workflow for PSIO. Despite minor differences in dimensional accuracy, these variations are clinically negligible and do not impact treatment planning or appliance fabrication.
期刊介绍:
The journal Clinical Oral Investigations is a multidisciplinary, international forum for publication of research from all fields of oral medicine. The journal publishes original scientific articles and invited reviews which provide up-to-date results of basic and clinical studies in oral and maxillofacial science and medicine. The aim is to clarify the relevance of new results to modern practice, for an international readership. Coverage includes maxillofacial and oral surgery, prosthetics and restorative dentistry, operative dentistry, endodontics, periodontology, orthodontics, dental materials science, clinical trials, epidemiology, pedodontics, oral implant, preventive dentistiry, oral pathology, oral basic sciences and more.