Journal article
Reproducibility and accuracy of linear measurements on dental models derived from cone-beam computed tomography compared with digital dental casts.
- de Waard O Postgraduate student, Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Electronic address: orthodontics@dent.umcn.nl.
- Rangel FA Junior researcher, Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
- Fudalej PS Senior lecturer, Department of Orthodontics, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; associate professor, Palacky University, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
- Bronkhorst EM Statistician/methodologist, Department of Preventive and Curative Dentistry, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
- Kuijpers-Jagtman AM Professor and chair, Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
- Breuning KH Assistant professor, Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
- 2014-08-31
Published in:
- American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics. - 2014
Cephalometry
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
Dental Arch
Dental Impression Technique
Dental Models
Humans
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
Imaging, Three-Dimensional
Reproducibility of Results
Software
Surface Properties
Tooth
Tooth Crown
English
INTRODUCTION
The aim of this study was to determine the reproducibility and accuracy of linear measurements on 2 types of dental models derived from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans: CBCT images, and Anatomodels (InVivoDental, San Jose, Calif); these were compared with digital models generated from dental impressions (Digimodels; Orthoproof, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands). The Digimodels were used as the reference standard.
METHODS
The 3 types of digital models were made from 10 subjects. Four examiners repeated 37 linear tooth and arch measurements 10 times. Paired t tests and the intraclass correlation coefficient were performed to determine the reproducibility and accuracy of the measurements.
RESULTS
The CBCT images showed significantly smaller intraclass correlation coefficient values and larger duplicate measurement errors compared with the corresponding values for Digimodels and Anatomodels. The average difference between measurements on CBCT images and Digimodels ranged from -0.4 to 1.65 mm, with limits of agreement values up to 1.3 mm for crown-width measurements. The average difference between Anatomodels and Digimodels ranged from -0.42 to 0.84 mm with limits of agreement values up to 1.65 mm.
CONCLUSIONS
Statistically significant differences between measurements on Digimodels and Anatomodels, and between Digimodels and CBCT images, were found. Although the mean differences might be clinically acceptable, the random errors were relatively large compared with corresponding measurements reported in the literature for both Anatomodels and CBCT images, and might be clinically important. Therefore, with the CBCT settings used in this study, measurements made directly on CBCT images and Anatomodels are not as accurate as measurements on Digimodels.
The aim of this study was to determine the reproducibility and accuracy of linear measurements on 2 types of dental models derived from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans: CBCT images, and Anatomodels (InVivoDental, San Jose, Calif); these were compared with digital models generated from dental impressions (Digimodels; Orthoproof, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands). The Digimodels were used as the reference standard.
METHODS
The 3 types of digital models were made from 10 subjects. Four examiners repeated 37 linear tooth and arch measurements 10 times. Paired t tests and the intraclass correlation coefficient were performed to determine the reproducibility and accuracy of the measurements.
RESULTS
The CBCT images showed significantly smaller intraclass correlation coefficient values and larger duplicate measurement errors compared with the corresponding values for Digimodels and Anatomodels. The average difference between measurements on CBCT images and Digimodels ranged from -0.4 to 1.65 mm, with limits of agreement values up to 1.3 mm for crown-width measurements. The average difference between Anatomodels and Digimodels ranged from -0.42 to 0.84 mm with limits of agreement values up to 1.65 mm.
CONCLUSIONS
Statistically significant differences between measurements on Digimodels and Anatomodels, and between Digimodels and CBCT images, were found. Although the mean differences might be clinically acceptable, the random errors were relatively large compared with corresponding measurements reported in the literature for both Anatomodels and CBCT images, and might be clinically important. Therefore, with the CBCT settings used in this study, measurements made directly on CBCT images and Anatomodels are not as accurate as measurements on Digimodels.
- Language
-
- English
- Open access status
- closed
- Identifiers
-
- DOI 10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.05.026
- PMID 25172255
- Persistent URL
- https://sonar.ch/global/documents/138915
Statistics
Document views: 40
File downloads: