Os modelos ortodônticos digitais são confiáveis? Uma revisão sistemática / Are the digital orthodontics models reliable? A systematic review

Introdução: Os modelos ortodônticos digitais são alternativas ao uso de modelos ortodônticos em gesso. Devido sua importância no diagnóstico, faz-se necessário averiguar a precisão dos softwares de modelos ortodônticos digitais disponíveis no mercado. Objetivo: Evidenciar qual software de modelos ortodônticos digitais possui maior confiabilidade. Material e métodos: Foi realizada busca sistemática nas seguintes bases de dados eletrônicas: Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase e Cochrane, Grey Literature e Clinical Trials, sem limitações quanto ao ano de publicação ou idioma. Foram incluídos estudos laboratoriais que utilizaram softwares destinados a geração de modelos ortodônticos digitais, comparando-os com modelos ortodônticos em gesso. Após seleção por título e resumo, os artigos potencialmente elegíveis foram lidos na íntegra. A qualidade metodológica e o risco de viés dos artigos incluídos foram avaliados de acordo com as descrições dos modelos, técnicas de medição e análises estatísticas. A qualidade metodológica foi classificada em alta, moderada ou baixa. Resultados: 13.333 artigos foram encontrados nas bases de dados utilizadas. Após a aplicação dos critérios de elegibilidade e remoção de duplicações, restaram apenas 41 artigos. 29 foram considerados de qualidade moderada e 12 de alta qualidade. A classificação quanto à confiabilidade variou de menos confiaveis, equivalentes e a mais confiaveis. Apresentando diferenças estatisticas em suas mensurações (p<0,05); sem significância clínica. Conclusão: os modelos ortodônticos digitais apresentaram mensurações acuradas, reprodutíveis e confiáveis quando comparado ao método convencional utilizando modelos de gesso.

Introduction: Digital models are an alternative for the use of orthodontic models in plaster. Due to its importance in the orthodontic dignified, it is necessary to ascertain the accuracy of the software of digital orthodontic models available in the market. Objective: To show which software of digital orthodontic models has greater reliability. Material and methods: A systematic search was performed in the following electronic databases: Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase and Cochrane, Gray Literature and Clinical Trials, with no limitations on year of publication or language. We included laboratory studies using digital orthodontic models, comparing them with orthodontic models of plaster through the evaluation of reliability through measurement techniques. After selection by title and abstract, potentially eligible articles have been read in full. The methodological quality and risk of bias of the included articles were evaluated according to the descriptions of the models, measurement techniques and statistical analyzes. The methodological quality was classified as high, moderate or low. Results: 13,333 articles were found in the databases used. After applying the eligibility criteria and removing duplicates, only 41 articles remained. 29 were considered of moderate quality and 12 of high quality. The ranking of digital models for reliability ranged from less reliable, equivalent, and more reliable. Presenting statistical differences in their measurements (p <0.05), without clinical significance. Conclusion: The measurements made in digital models can be as accurate, reproducible and reliable as the conventional method using plaster models.

Aesthetic perception of the height of the lip vermilion border by black and white laypeople

AIM: To assess the degree of aesthetic perception of the height of the vermilion border of the lip among laypeople of black and white ethnicity. MATERIAL AND METHODS: in possession of an extraoral photograph of a 25 years old woman with lips at rest, changes were effectuated reducing the height of the lip vermilion in increments of 0.5 mm (0-default to -3.0 mm). To do so, a program for image manipulation (Adobe Photoshop CS4, San Jose, CA, USA) was used. Once the images obtained, they were printed and arranged randomly on a questionnaire to be evaluated by the examiners (n=200). A graduated visual analogue scale of 0 to 10 points for aesthetic evaluation, where 0 represented "not very attractive", 5 "attractive" and 10 "very attractive", was used. To evaluate the differences between the examiners, the Mann-Whitney test was used. RESULTS: There was significant difference between male and female evaluators in evaluating the effect of the height of the vermilion on the attractiveness of the lip. Black and white people were able to identify changes in the height of the vermilion border of the lip, verifying that this height is acceptable till -2mm. Black evaluators gave lower scores to the -3 mm height vermilion than white evaluators, and this has been a clinically significant difference (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: changes in the height of the vermilion border of the lip are acceptable up to -2mm gap among black and white people of both genders, gradually decaying to major changes and having a preference, mostly, for the greater height of the vermilion border of the lip.