Abstract
Serial 3-dimensional dental model superimposition provides a risk-free, detailed evaluation of morphological alterations on a patient’s mouth. Here, we evaluated accuracy and precision of five palatal areas, used for superimposition of maxillary 3D digital dental casts. Sixteen pre- and post-orthodontic treatment dental casts of growing patients (median time lapse: 15.1 months) were superimposed on each palatal area using the iterative closest point algorithm. Area A (medial 2/3 of the third rugae and a small area dorsal to them) was considered the gold standard, due to high anatomical stability. Areas B, C, and D added a distal extension along the midpalatal raphe, an anterior extension to the second rugae, and the remaining palatal surface, respectively. Area E was similar to A, located more posteriorly. Non parametric multivariate models showed minimal or no effect on accuracy and precision by operator, time point, or software settings. However, the choice of superimposition area resulted in statistically significant differences in accuracy and clinically significant differences in detected tooth movement (95% limits of agreement exceeding 1 mm and 3°). Superimposition on area A provided accurate, reproducible, and precise results. Outcomes were comparable for area B, but deteriorated when alternative areas were used.
Highlights
The use of 3 dimensional (3D) digital dental casts has widely expanded in recent years
Superimposition of dental models is highly preferable compared to radiographically obtained models, since impression taking or direct 3D intraoral scanning is a risk-free procedure with no radiation concerns
Only one study has tested the validity of tooth movement assessment in superimposed dental models of growing patients[20], using almost the whole palate as the superimposition reference area
Summary
The use of 3 dimensional (3D) digital dental casts has widely expanded in recent years. Two studies in non-growing patients that used miniscrews as a gold standard superimposition reference suggested the medial part of the third rugae and a small region dorsal to it as a stable superimposition reference[3, 4]. Studies on non-growing patients that compared tooth movement in cephalometric radiographs with that measured on superimposed digital models suggested a mushroom-shaped palatal area including the rugae as a head[8] or the placement of landmarks on the third ruga[9]. Only one study has tested the validity of tooth movement assessment in superimposed dental models of growing patients[20], using almost the whole palate as the superimposition reference area.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
