ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different superimposition methods on the accuracy and predictability of conventional and virtual diagnostic setups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten finished cases were used to make a conventional setup and a virtual setup. Second molars were not moved in the two setup situations to allow a reference for superimposition. Conventional and virtual setups were superimposed and compared by second molar registration and the whole surface best fit method (WSBF). Conventional and virtual setups were compared to the posttreatment models with WSBF and palatal rugae best fit (PRBF). Anterior, intermediate, and posterior regions of the dental arches were compared. The paired t-test was used to compare the mean differences between conventional and virtual setups, posttreatment models and both conventional and virtual setups by the WSBF method, and between maxillary posttreatment and virtual setup models using the WSBF and PRBF methods. RESULTS: Conventional and virtual setups differed depending on the two superimposition methods used. Superimposition of the posttreatment models and both setups using WSBF presented no statistically significant differences. There were statistically significant differences between posttreatment and virtual setup models using WSBF and PRBF superimposition methods. CONCLUSIONS: The model superimposition method influenced the assessment of accuracy and predictability of setup models. There were statistically significant differences between the maxillary posttreatment and virtual setup models using the WSBF and the PRBF superimposition methods. It is important to establish stable structures to evaluate the accuracy and predictability of setup models.
Subject(s)
Imaging, Three-Dimensional , Models, Dental , Maxilla/diagnostic imaging , Molar/diagnostic imaging , PalateABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy and reliability of measurements performed using two different software programs on digital models generated using two types of plaster model scanners (a laser scanner and a computed tomography [CT] scanner). METHODS: Thirty plaster models were scanned with a 3Shape laser scanner and with a Flash CT scanner. Two examiners performed measurements on plaster models by using digital calipers and on digital models by using Ortho Analyzer (3Shape) and Digimodel® (OrthoProof) software programs. Forty-two measurements, including tooth diameter, crown height, overjet, overbite, intercanine and intermolar distances, and sagittal relationship, were obtained. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were not found between the plaster and digital model measurements (ANOVA); however, some discrepancies were clinically relevant. Plaster and digital model measurements made using the two scanning methods showed high intraclass coefficient correlation values and acceptable 95% limits of agreement in the Bland-Altman analysis. The software used did not influence the accuracy of measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Digital models generated from plaster casts by using laser and CT scanning and measured using two different software programs are accurate, and the measurements are reliable. Therefore, both fabrication methods and software could be used interchangeably.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: This study compared the accuracy of plaster models from alginate impressions and printed models from intraoral scanning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 28 volunteers were selected and alginate impressions and intraoral scans were used to make plaster models and digital models of their dentition, respectively. The digital models were printed using a stereolithographic (SLA) 3D printer with a horseshoe-shaped design. Two calibrated examiners measured distances on the plaster and printed models with a digital caliper. The paired t test was used to determine intraobserver error and compare the measurements. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the reliability of measurements for each model type. RESULTS: The measurements on plaster models and printed models show some significant differences in tooth dimensions and interarch parameters, but these differences were not clinically relevant, except for the transversal measurements. The upper and lower intermolar distances on the printed models were statistically significant and clinically relevant smaller. CONCLUSIONS: Printed digital models with the SLA 3D printer studied, with a horseshoe-shaped base made from intraoral scans cannot replace conventional plaster models from alginate impressions in orthodontics for diagnosis and treatment planning because of their clinically relevant transversal contraction.
Subject(s)
Calcium Sulfate , Computer Simulation , Models, Dental , Orthodontics , Printing, Three-Dimensional , Stereolithography , Adult , Correlation of Data , Humans , Photography, DentalABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A plaster dental model is a patient's traditional three-dimensional (3D) record. If the dental crowns from a plaster model are separated and positioned in wax, this setup of the crowns can be used to simulate orthodontic treatment. The traditional way to make this dental setup requires significant time by the orthodontist and in the orthodontic lab. New developments in dentistry and orthodontics include the possibility of virtual setups. AIM: In this article, the differences between conventional setups with plaster models and virtual setups are discussed. METHODS: A clinical patient is described for whom two different setups were made and compared by model superimposition with Geomagic Qualify software. RESULTS: According to the literature and the results from this study, virtual setups and conventional setups with plaster models are equally accurate. CONCLUSION: Virtual setups present several advantages, e.g., digital storage, digital models cannot be damaged, the same model can undergo several treatment simulations, and communication between dental and surgical professionals and between dental professionals and patients is facilitated. Despite these advantages, considerable time and training are needed for dental professionals to master and adopt the general use of digital models and virtual setups in dentistry.
Subject(s)
Dental Casting Technique , Imaging, Three-Dimensional/methods , Models, Dental , Tooth/anatomy & histology , Tooth/diagnostic imaging , User-Computer Interface , Anatomic Landmarks/anatomy & histology , Anatomic Landmarks/diagnostic imaging , Cephalometry/methods , Computer Simulation , Computer-Aided Design , Humans , Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted/methods , Jaw/anatomy & histology , Jaw/diagnostic imaging , Models, Biological , Radiography, Dental/methods , Reproducibility of Results , Sensitivity and Specificity , Technology Assessment, BiomedicalABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to evaluate different approaches to deactivating myofascial trigger points (MTPs). Twenty-one women with bilateral MTPs in the masseter muscle were randomly divided into three groups: laser therapy, needle treatment and control. Treatment effectiveness was evaluated after four sessions with intervals ranging between 48 and 72 h. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to measure pain perception/sensation. The Wilcoxon test based on results expressed on a visual analog scale (VAS) demonstrated a significant (P < 0.05) decrease in pain only in the laser and needle treatments groups, although a significant increase in the pressure pain threshold was evident only for needling with anesthetic injection (P = 0.0469), and laser therapy at a dose of 4 J/cm² (P = 0.0156). Based on these results, it was concluded that four sessions of needling with 2% lidocaine injection with intervals between 48 and 72 h without a vasoconstrictor, or laser therapy at a dose of 4 J/cm², are effective for deactivation of MTPs.