A comparison of accuracy between three different facial detection systems for prosthodontic esthetic preview: a single-blinded in vitro study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of 3 different devices for facial images acquisition, useful for prosthodontic esthetic preview. METHODS: Bidimensional extraoral photographs (Nikon D300), facial scans (Bellus3D) and 3D digital stereophotogrammetry photos (3dMD Face System) were acquired from 15 patients. The intraoral impressions of all subjects were digitally taken through a scanner (i500; Medit). Files obtained from each acquisition method were transferred on Exocad Software, and the measurements of the frontal teeth were performed and compared with those of the intraoral scans, assumed as reference. The data were statistically analyzed (Friedman and Dunn tests) with P<0.05. RESULTS: As for central and lateral incisors, no significant difference emerged between 2D digital photography and intraoral scans, both in height and width. Measures obtained with Bellus3D significantly differed from the reference data in width of all teeth, except for central incisors. Values referred to canines were those more subjected to significant distortions in width for all devices. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this study, measures of frontal teeth acquired by 2D digital photography were similar to those of intraoral scans both in height and width, while those obtained with 3D facial scanners were more subjected to distortions in mesial-distal dimension.

Customized composite veneers from a totally digital workflow: A case report.

A treatment plan based on the use of a preview software can offer the possibility to rapidly communicate with the patient. Fully digital workflow allows for making several objects at the same time in a precise and cost-efficient manner.

Reliability of a Virtual Prosthodontic Project Realized through a 2D and 3D Photographic Acquisition: An Experimental Study on the Accuracy of Different Digital Systems.

AIMS: The study aims to assess the accuracy of digital planning in dentistry, evaluating the characteristics of different intraoral 3D scanners and comparing it with traditional imaging 2D recording methods. Specifically, using computer aided design (CAD) software and measuring inside CAD software, authors want to verify the reliability of different models obtained with different techniques and machines. METHODS: 12 patients that needed aesthetic restorative treatment were enrolled in the study. All the patients underwent recording data of the height and width dental elements 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 size using different technologies and comparing 2D with 3D methods. A T test was then applied in order to verify whether there was a statistically significant difference between the measurements obtained, comparing the different tools data (Emerald, TRIOS, Photogrammetry and DSS (Digital Smile System)) with the reference values. RESULTS: No significant differences emerged in the measurements made with the different scanners (Trios 3Shape ®, Planmeca Emerald ®) and photogrammetry. Therefore, what should be underlined regarding the 2D measurements is the speed and simplicity compared to all 3D techniques, so this work can help to better define the field of application and the limits connected to 2D techniques, giving a good window of the technique. CONCLUSIONS: The low number of patients is not sufficient to provide statistically significant results, but the digital planning future prospects seem to be promising. This study results highlighted how a photogrammetric scanner for dental arches would only have a much smaller shooting field size and greater accuracy. Despite these considerations, the photogrammetric facial scanner provided excellent results for the measurement of individual teeth, showing a great versatility of use.