Reliability of mixed dentition space analysis using a digital model obtained from an optical impression: a preliminary study.

OBJECTIVE: While mixed dentition space analysis is a common practice in pediatric dentistry, digital models created using an intraoral scanner are not as widely used in clinical settings. This preliminary study used a very small sample size with one reference model and aimed to (1) compare the accuracy of mixed dentition space analysis using a digital model obtained from an optical impression with that of conventional plaster model-based analysis and (2) assess inter-examiner differences. RESULTS: The space required for the mandibular permanent canine and premolars and arch length discrepancy were calculated using each model. The largest significant difference between plaster- and digital model-based analyses was identified when the right arch length discrepancy was considered (-0.49 mm; 95% confidence interval: -0.95-0.03); however, the value was considered clinically insignificant. Significant inter-examiner differences were observed for six items of the plaster model; however, no such differences were observed when using the digital model. In conclusion, digital model space analysis may have the same level of accuracy as conventional plaster model analysis and likely results in smaller inter-examiner differences than plaster model analysis.

Influence of scanbody design and intraoral scanner on the trueness of complete arch implant digital impressions: An in vitro study.

This study aimed to compare the accuracy of full-arch digital implant impressions using seven different scanbodies and four intraoral scanners. A 3D-printed maxillary model with six implants and their respective multi-unit abutments was used for this study. Seven scanbodies (SB1, SB2, SB3, SB4, SB5, SB6, and SB7) and four intraoral scanners (Primescan®, Omnican®, Trios 3®, and Trios 4®) were assessed. Each combination group was scanned ten times and a dental lab scanner (D2000, 3Shape) was used as a reference. All scans were exported as STL files, imported into Convince software (3Shape) for alignment, and later into Blender software, where their 3D positions were analyzed using a Python script. The 3D deviation, angular deviation, and linear distance between implants #3 and #14 were also measured. Accuracy was measured in terms of "trueness" (scanbody 3D deviation between intraoral scan and desktop scan). Kruskal-Wallis followed by the Bonferroni correction was used to analyze the data (⍺ = .05). The study found statistically significant differences in digital impression accuracy among the scanners and scanbodies (p<0.001). When comparing different intraoral scanners, the Primescan system showed the smallest 3D deviation (median 110.59 µm) and differed statistically from the others, while Trios 4 (median 122.35 µm) and Trios 3 (median 130.62 µm) did not differ from each other (p = .284). No differences were found in the linear distance between implants #3 and #14 between Trios 4, Primescan, and Trios 3 systems. When comparing different scanbodies, the lowest median values for 3D deviation were obtained by SB2 (72.27µm) and SB7 (93.31µm), and they did not differ from each other (p = .116). The implant scanbody and intraoral scanner influenced the accuracy of digital impressions on completely edentulous arches.

Evaluation the scanning accuracy of Blue-Light laboratory scanners in complete edentulous Maxilla with multiple implants with titanium scan bodies / Evaluación de la precisión de escaneado de los escáneres de laboratorio de luz azul en maxilares desdentados completos con implantes múltiples con cuerpos de escaneado de titanio

Abstract To evaluate the accuracy of complete arch scanning with multiple implant titanium scan bodies using laboratory scanners. A master model of an edentulous maxillary arch with 6 implants was fabricated. Titanium scan bodies were inserted into the model. Three laboratory scanners were used: D2000 (3Shape), Vinyl High Resolution (Smart Optics), and inEos X5 (Dentsply Sirona). The master model was consecutively scanned ten times using dental laboratory scanners (LS) without detaching and repositioning the scan bodies. Linear and angular accuracy between adjacent implants was measured using inspection software (Control X, Geomagic). The accuracy of the complete arch scans was calculated. Implant regions were defined as; parallel (R1: #24-26 and #16-14), angled (R2: #22-24 and #14-12), angled to occlusal plane (R3: #12-22), and cross-arch (R4: #16-26). The effect of LS and implant region on accuracy was compared using two-Way ANOVA (α=0.05). Significant greater linear distortion was noted in R4 (61.2±17.9µm) compared to R1 (23.4±15.5µm) and R2 (26±17.7µm) (p<0.01). Greater linear distortions were noted in R4 with D2000 (0.07±0.016 degrees) and Vinyl High Resolution (0.067±0.02 degrees) than inEos X5 (0.032±0.021 degrees) (p>0.05). Greater mean linear precisions were noted in R1 (9±8µm) and R3 (9.3±8.3µm) than R4 (12.6±10.3µm) (p<0.05). The highest linear precision was noted in D2000 (7.2±7.6µm) (p<0.05). The angular precision of D2000 (0.02±0.015 degrees) was the highest (p<0.01). The angular precisión of R4 (0.036±0.018 degrees) was the lowest (p<0.01). This study revealed that the trueness was affected by the implant region and the precision was affected by both LS and implant region.

Resumen Evaluar la precisión del escaneado de la arcada completa con cuerpos de escaneado de titanio de múltiples implantes utilizando escáneres de laboratorio. Se fabricó un modelo maestro de una arcada maxilar edéntula con 6 implantes. Se insertaron cuerpos de escaneo de titanio en el modelo. Se utilizaron tres escáneres de laboratorio: D2000 (3Shape), Vinyl High Resolution (Smart Optics) e inEos X5 (Dentsply Sirona). El modelo maestro se escaneó consecutivamente diez veces usando escáneres de laboratorio dental (LS) sin separar y reposicionar los cuerpos de escaneo. La precisión lineal y angular entre implantes adyacentes se midió utilizando un software de inspección (Control X, Geomagic). Se calculó la precisión de los escaneos completos del arco. Las regiones del implante se definieron como; paralelo (R1: #24-26 y #16-14), angulado (R2: #22-24 y #14-12), angulado al plano oclusal (R3: #12-22) y cruzado (R4: #16-26). El efecto de LS y la región del implante en la precisión se comparó mediante ANOVA de dos vías (α=0,05). Se observó una distorsión lineal significativamente mayor en R4 (61,2±17,9µm) en comparación con R1 (23,4±15,5µm) y R2 (26 ±17,7µm) (p<0,01). Se observaron mayores distorsiones lineales en R4 con D2000 (0,07±0,016 grados) y vinilo de alta resolución (0,067±0,02 grados) que en inEos X5 (0,032±0,021 grados) (p>0,05). Se observaron precisiones lineales medias mayores en R1 (9±8µm) y R3 (9,3±8,3µm) que en R4 (12,6±10,3µm) (p<0,05). La mayor precisión lineal se observó en D2000 (7,2±7,6 µm) (p<0,05). La precisión angular de D2000 (0,02±0,015 grados) fue la más alta (p<0,01). La precisión angular de R4 (0,036±0,018 grados) fue la más baja (p<0,01). Este estudio reveló que la veracidad se vio afectada por la región del implante y la precisión se vio afectada tanto por LS como por la región del implante.

The Correlation between Mandibular Arch Shape and Vertical Skeletal Pattern.

Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the correlation between the mandibular arch shape and the vertical skeletal pattern in growing patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 73 Caucasian patients (33 males and 40 females; mean age 9.4) were retrospectively enrolled from a pool of patients treated in chronological order at the Department of Orthodontics, University of Foggia, Italy, from April 2018 to December 2021. Each patient received a laterolateral radiograph and a digital scan of the dental arch. Eight cephalometric parameters (lower gonial angle, intermaxillary angle, divergence angle, Wits index, Jarabak ratio, OP-MP angle, PP-OP angle, and ANB) and five dental measurements (posterior mandibular arch width, anterior mandibular arch width, mandibular occlusal angle, posterior width on distobuccal molar cusps, and molar angle) were analyzed and then compared. A Spearman's rho correlation test between the cephalometric measurements and the dental measurements was performed. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results: A negative statistically significant correlation was found between the Jarabak ratio and the intermolar angle; a statistically significant correlation was also observed between the Wits index, the posterior mandibular width, and the occlusal mandibular angle; the ANB angle and the occlusal mandibular angle; the intermaxillary angle (PP-PM) and the mandibular occlusal angle, posterior mandibular width on the disto-vestibular cusp, and the intermolar angle; and the OP-MP angle and mandibular occlusal angle and the posterior mandibular width on the disto-vestibular cusp. Conclusions: The mandibular arch form may be related to certain predisposing features in craniofacial morphology, such as jaw divergence, the Jarabak ratio, and the intermaxillary angle.

Trueness and precision of complete arch dentate digital models produced by intraoral and desktop scanners: An ex-vivo study.

OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to compare the trueness and precision of five intraoral scanners (Emerald S, iTero Element 5D, Medit i700, Primescan, and Trios 4) and two indirect digitization techniques for both teeth and soft tissues on fresh mandibular and maxillary cadaver jaws. METHODS: The maxilla and mandible of a fully dentate cadaver were scanned by the ATOS industrial scanner to create a master model. Then, the specimens were scanned eight times by each intraoral scanner (IOS). In addition, 8 polyvinylsiloxane (PVS) impressions were made and digitized with a Medit T710 desktop scanner. Stone models were then poured and again scanned with the desktop scanner. All IOS, PVS, and stone models were compared to the master model to calculate the mean absolute surface deviation for mandibular teeth, maxillary teeth, and palate. RESULTS: For mandibular teeth, the PVS trueness was only significantly better than the Medit i700 (p < 0.001) and Primescan (p < 0.05). In maxillary teeth, the PVS trueness was significantly better than all IOSs (p < 0.05-0.001); the stone trueness was significantly better than Emerald S (p < 0.01), Medit i700 (p < 0.001) and Primescan (p < 0.01). In the palate, PVS and stone trueness were significantly lower than the iTero Element 5D (p < 0.01) and Trios 4 (p < p < 0.01). Stone trueness was significantly lower than the Medit i700 (p < 0.05). The precision in the palate was significantly lower for PVS and stone than for Emerald S (p < 0.01, p < 0.05), iTero Element 5D (p < 0.01, p < 0.01), Primescan (p < 0.001, p < 0.001), and Trios 4 (p < 0.001, p < 0.01). Significant differences in trueness between the IOSs were observed only in the mandibular teeth. The Medit i700 performed worse than Emerald S (p < 0.01) and iTero Element 5D (p < 0.01). For mandibular teeth, the Medit i700 was significantly more precise than Primescan (p < 0.01) and the Emerald S (p < 0.05). The Trios 4 was significantly less precise than Emerald S (p < 0.05). The precision of Medit i700 was significantly worse than iTero Element 5D (p < 0.01) for maxillary teeth, as well as the Primescan (p < 0.01) and Trios 4 (p < 0.05) for the palate. CONCLUSIONS: In general, indirectly digitized models from PVS impressions had higher trueness than IOS for maxillary teeth; precision between the two methods was similar. IOS was more accurate for palatal tissues. The differences in trueness and precision for mandibular teeth between the various techniques were negligible. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: All investigated IOSs and indirect digitization could be used for complete arch scanning in mandibular and maxillary dentate arches. However, direct optical digitization is preferable for the palate due to the low accuracy of physical impression techniques for soft tissues.

A novel post-processing strategy to improve the accuracy of complete-arch intraoral scanning for implants: an in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a new post-processing strategy that utilizes an auxiliary device to adjust intraoral scans and improve the accuracy of 3D models of complete-arch dental implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An edentulous resin model with 6 dental implants was prepared. An auxiliary device, consisting of an opaque base and artificial landmarks, was fabricated and mounted onto the resin model. Twenty intraoral scans (raw scans) were taken using this setup. A new post-processing strategy was proposed to adjust the raw scans using reverse engineering software (verified group). Additionally, ten conventional gypsum casts were duplicated and digitized using a laboratory scanner. The linear and angular trueness and precision of the models were evaluated and compared. The effect of the proposed strategy on the accuracy of complete-arch intraoral scans was analyzed using one-way ANOVA. RESULTS: The linear trueness (29.7 µm) and precision (24.8 µm) of the verified group were significantly better than the raw scans (46.6 µm, 44.7 µm) and conventional casts (51.3 µm, 36.5 µm), particularly in cross-arch sites. However, the angular trueness (0.114°) and precision (0.085°) of the conventional casts were significantly better than both the verified models (0.298°, 0.168°) and the raw scans (0.288°, 0.202°). CONCLUSIONS: The novel post-processing strategy is effective in enhancing the linear accuracy of complete-arch implant IO scans, especially in cross-arch sites. However, further improvement is needed to eliminate the angular deviations. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Errors generated from intraoral scanning in complete edentulous arches exceed the clinical threshold. The elimination of stitching errors in the raw scans particularly in the cross-arch sites, through the proposed post-processing strategy would enhance the accuracy of complete-arch implant prostheses.

Assessment of early dental arch growth modification with removable maxillary expansion by cone-beam computed tomography and lateral cephalometric radiographs: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the skeletal and dental changes of patients brought by early removable maxillary expansion (ERME) treatment to explore the clinical treatment effect of ERME on early dental arch growth modification. METHODS: Subject children aged 6-10 years with a maxillary transverse deficiency received ERME treatment, cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and lateral cephalometric radiographs were measured before and after treatment, and statistical differences in the measured items were evaluated with corresponding statistical methods to explore the skeletal and dental changes. RESULTS: After ERME treatment, there was a statistical increase in the maxillary basal bone arch width, nasal cavity width, maxillary alveolar bone arch width, and maxillary dental arch width. A buccal inclination of the maxillary alveolar bone and a buccal inclination and buccal movement in the alveolar bone of maxillary first molars were found. The maxillary skeletal expansion was statistically greater than the dental expansion. Increases in the mandibular alveolar bone arch width and dental arch width happened after treatment. A decrease in angle ANB and an increase in Ptm-A, U1-SN, U1-PP, L1-MP, and L6-MP were found after treatment. No statistical changes in the growth pattern-related measured items were observed. CONCLUSIONS: ERME could expand the maxillary basal bone arch width, nasal cavity width, maxillary alveolar bone arch width, and maxillary dental arch width. The maxillary skeletal expansion was greater than the dental expansion. Secondary increases in the mandibular alveolar bone and dental arch widths would happen after ERME. ERME would result in a mandibular advancement, a labial inclination of maxillary anterior teeth, and an increase of maxillary sagittal length, and would not change the patient's growth pattern. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University. (WCHSIRB-D-2020-446).

Factors that influence the accuracy of maxillomandibular relationship at maximum intercuspation acquired by using intraoral scanners: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To review the factors that influence the accuracy of the maxillomandibular relationship at maximum intercuspation (MIP) acquired by using intraoral scanners (IOSs). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic search was performed using five databases: MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, World of Science, and Scopus. A manual search was also completed. Studies assessing the factors that influence the MIP acquired by using IOSs were included and organized based on the analyzed factor. Studies were evaluated by applying the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist. RESULTS: Twenty-nine articles were included. Seven factors have been identified: IOS system, scan extension, edentulous areas, number, location, and extension of occlusal records, occlusal force, tooth mobility, and alignment methods. Nine studies evaluated the influence of IOS system. Four studies assessed the influence of the extension of the arch scan. Three studies evaluated the effect of edentulous spaces. Four studies agreed on the impact of the number, location, and extension of the occlusal records on the MIP accuracy. One study assessed the influence of the occlusal force, showing a smaller average interocclusal space with increased occlusal force. One study evaluated the influence of tooth mobility. Seven studies analyzed the influence of the alignment method on the MIP accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the studies reported no difference on the MIP accuracy between half- and complete-arch scans. Areas with 2 or more missing teeth reduce the MIP accuracy. A bilateral and frontal record including 2 teeth or a bilateral posterior occlusal including at least 4-teeth is indicated for maximizing the MIP accuracy. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: When a complete-arch intraoral scans is obtained, a bilateral and frontal record including 2 teeth or a bilateral posterior occlusal record including at least 4-teeth is recommended for maximizing the accuracy of the MIP. When a half-arch intraoral scan is acquired, a posterior occlusal record including at least 4-teeth is indicated for optimizing the accuracy of the MIP.

Influence of the dental arch and number of cutting-off and rescanning mesh holes on the accuracy of implant scans in partially edentulous situations.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the influence of the dental arch and cutting-off and rescanning procedures on the accuracy of complete-arch implant scans in partially edentulous arches. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A maxillary and a mandibular partially edentulous typodont with implant abutment analogs placed in the right and left first molar and right central incisor sites were digitized to create reference models by using an industrial optical scanner (7 Series Desktop Scanner; Dentalwings). Two experimental groups were scanned using an intraoral scanner (IOS) (TRIOS 4; 3Shape A/S): the Maxillary group (Mx) and the Mandibular group (Mb). Four subgroups were generated depending on the number of rescanned mesh holes: No holes (Mx-G0, Mb-G0), 1 hole (Mx-G1, Mb-G1), 2 holes (Mx-G2, Mb-G2) and 3 holes (Mx-G3, Mb-G3). A 3-dimensional metrology software (Geomagic Control X; 3D Systems) was used to measure the difference between the reference and the experimental scans computing the root mean square (RMS) error calculation. Two-way ANOVA and a post-hoc Tukey test were used to analyze the trueness data (α=0.05). Levene test was used to evaluate the prevision (α=0.05). RESULTS: The Mx group obtained a trueness mean value of 54 ± 17 µm and a mean precision value of 54 ± 17 µm, while the Mb group presented a trueness mean value of 67 ± 23 µm and a mean precision value of 66 ± 22 µm. The Mx group demonstrated significantly better trueness than the Mb group (P<.001). The G0 and G1 subgroups had the highest trueness values among the subgroups tested. No significant difference was observed between G0 and G1, G1 and G2, and G2 and G3 subgroups in trueness and precision. However, the G0 had significantly better trueness and precision values compared to G2 and G3 subgroups. In addition, the G1 had significantly better trueness values than the G3 subgroup. However, the Levene test revealed no difference in the precision mean values among the subgroups tested. CONCLUSIONS: Implant scanning trueness was affected by the dental arch and the number of rescanned mesh holes using the IOS tested. A higher number of rescanned mesh holes decreased the scanning trueness. The stitching algorithm of the IOS software tested after the mesh hole scan demonstrated a significant error, especially when multiples mesh holes are involved in the same arch. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Given that cutting-off and rescanning techniques can reduce trueness, clinicians should consider whether these techniques are necessary in complete digital workflows. This is particularly important when fabricating multiple single implant-supported restorations in the same arch.

Evaluation of the accuracy of intraoral scanners for complete-arch scanning: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the complete-arch scanning accuracy of different intraoral scanners (IOSs) to that of reference standard tessellation language (STL) files. DATA: Studies comparing the trueness and precision of IOS STL files with those of reference STL scans for different arch types (dentate, edentulous, completely edentulous with implants, and partially edentulous with implants) were included in this study. SOURCES: An electronic search of five databases restricted to the English Language was conducted in October 2021. STUDY SELECTION: A total of 3,815 studies were identified, of which 114 were eligible for inclusion. After study selection and data extraction, pair-wise comparison and NMA were performed to define the accuracy of scanning for four arch subgroups using four outcomes (trueness and precision expressed as mean absolute deviation and root mean square values). Cochrane guidelines and the QUADAS-2 tool were used to assess the risk of bias. GRADE was used for certainty assessment. RESULTS: Fifty-three articles were included in this NMA. Altogether, 26 IOSs were compared directly and indirectly in 10 network systems. The accuracy of IOSs scans were not significantly different from the reference scans for dentate arches (three IOSs), edentulous arches (three IOSs), and completely edentulous arches with implants (one IOS). The accuracy of the IOSs was significantly different from the reference scans for partially edentulous arches with implants. Significant accuracy differences were found between the IOSs, regardless of clinical scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of complete-arch scanning by IOSs differs based on clinical scenarios. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Different IOSs should be used according to the complete arch type.

Three-dimensional relationship between the degree of bilateral impacted mandibular third molars angulation and the mandibular dental arch parameters: a cross-sectional comparative study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to three-dimensionally evaluate the relationship between the degree of bilateral impacted mandibular third molar (IM3M) angulation and the mandibular dental arch parameters in normal skeletal and dental malocclusion patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective cross-sectional comparative study, 120 adult subjects' cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images were three-dimensionally analyzed. The sample included 120 adults aged 20-30 years, with a gender distribution of 51 male and 69 female participants. The sample was divided into 100 adults with bilateral IM3M (study group) and 20 adults with normal bilateral erupted M3M (control group). The study group was sub-divided into three groups according to the degree of IM3M buccolingual angulation (BL°): group A, < 12° on the center of the ridge (N = 30), group B, 12-24° off-center of the ridge (N = 40), group C, > 24° off-center of the ridge (N = 30). The study group was also sub-divided into two groups according to IM3M mesiodistal angulation (MD°): group 1 from 10 to 45° (N = 36), group 2 > 45° (N = 64). Comparison within and between groups was performed using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey's post hoc test. The correlation between IM3M, BL, and MD angulation and the mandibular arch parameter was calculated using Pearson's correlation coefficient. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences (P < 0.001) were found between the IM3M BL° and anterior teeth inclination, arch length (AL), and inter-second molar width (inter 2nd MW) as well as between the IM3M MD° with anterior crowding and the arch length (P < 0.001). A significant positive correlation was found between IM3M BL° and anterior teeth inclination and between IM3M MD° and anterior teeth crowding and inter 2nd MW. A significant negative correlation was observed between IM3M BL° and inter 1st MW and 2nd MW. CONCLUSION: The degree of buccolingual and mesiodistal angulation of the impacted mandibular third molars was related with mandibular dentoalveolar changes. Increased buccolingual angulation is generally associated with increased anterior teeth inclination and decreased 1st and 2nd inter-molar width. The increase in mesiodistal angulations was generally related with increased anterior teeth crowding and 2nd inter-molar width. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Assessment of the relationship between the impacted mandibular third molars and the degree of arch discrepancy, and the position of mandibular incisors in the three planes of space might help in the decision-making process for the extraction of the impacted third molars in adult patients.

Accuracy and eligibility of Bonwill⁃Hawley arch form established by CBCT image for dental crowding measurement: a comparative study with the conventional brass wire and caliper methods.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to develop a novel Bonwill⁃Hawley method (Bonwill⁃Hawley arch form based on CBCT image) for the assessment of dental crowding, and to investigate and compare the accuracy and eligibility with the conventional brass wire and caliper methods under different crowding conditions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty patients with the pair of plaster casts and CBCT data were collected. All the casts were marked and transformed into digital models using iTero scanner, and imported into OrthoCAD software to measure the required space. Using the conventional brass wire (M1) and caliper methods (M2), the available space and dental crowding were measured and calculated basing on digital models, respectively. Correspondingly, the axial planes in the level of dental arches were oriented and captured from the CBCT images to draw the Bonwill⁃Hawley arch forms (M3), which were used to measure and calculate the available space and dental crowding. For each method, intra and inter-examiner reliabilities were evaluated with intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs). Wilcoxon test and Kruskal-Wallis test were performed for statistically analyzing the discrepancy among different groups. RESULTS: Both intra- and inter-examiner reliability were generally excellent for all parameters obtained by the three methods, except for the dental crowding measured using M1(ICC: 0.473/0.261). The dental crowding measured using M2 were significantly increased in mild, moderate and severe-crowding groups compared with M1. However, no significant difference was detected between M1 and M3 in severe-crowding group (maxilla, p = 0.108 > 0.05; mandible, p = 0.074 > 0.05). With the deterioration of crowding condition, the discrepancy of dental crowding between M1 and M2, or M1 and M3 were significantly decreased (maxilla, M2-M1, mild VS serve, p = 0.003 < 0.05; maxilla, M3-M1, mild VS serve, p = 0.003 < 0.05; mandible, M2-M1, mild VS serve, p = 0.000 < 0.001; mandible, M3-M1, mild VS serve, p = 0.043 < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Dental crowding measured using the novel Bonwill⁃Hawley method was relatively greater than the caliper method, but not exceeding the brass wire method, which wound gradually come close to the brass wire method with the deterioration of crowding condition. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The Bonwill⁃Hawley method basing on CBCT image proved to be a reliable and acceptable choice for orthodontists to analyze the dental crowding.

Influence of arch location and scanning pattern on the scanning accuracy, scanning time, and number of photograms of complete-arch intraoral digital implant scans.

OBJECTIVES: To measure the influence of arch location and scanning pattern on the accuracy, scanning time, and number of photograms of complete-arch implant scans acquired using an intraoral scanner (IOS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A maxillary (maxillary group) and mandibular (mandibular group) model with 6 implant abutments on each cast was digitized using a desktop scanner (control scans). Six subgroups were created based on the scanning pattern used to acquire the scans using an IOS (Trios 4): occluso-buccal-lingual (OBL subgroup), occluso-linguo-buccal (OLB subgroup), bucco-linguo-occlusal (BLO subgroup), linguo-buccal-occlusal (LBO subgroup), zigzag (ZZ subgroup), and circumferential (C subgroup). The control scans were used as a reference to measure the discrepancy with the experimental scans calculating the root mean square error. Two-way ANOVA and the pairwise comparison Tukey tests were used to analyze the data (α = .05). RESULTS: Significant discrepancies in trueness (p < .001), precision (p < .001), scanning time (p < .001), and number of photograms (p < .001) were found. The maxillary group obtained poorer trueness and precision values, higher scanning times, and a larger number of photograms than the mandibular group. The C subgroup obtained the best trueness and precision values, but was not significantly different from the OLB, BLO, and LBO subgroups. The ZZ subgroup obtained the worst trueness and precision values (p < .05). The C subgroup obtained the lowest scanning time and number of photograms (p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Arch location and scanning pattern influenced scanning accuracy, scanning time, and number of photograms of complete-arch implant scans.

Intraoral Scans of Full Dental Arches: An In Vitro Measurement Study of the Accuracy of Different Intraoral Scanners.

The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the accuracy of different intraoral scanners (IOS), according to different scanning strategies and to the experience of the operator. Six IOS setups were used in this study. Ten scans of a complete epoxy-resin-made maxillary dental arch were performed with each IOS, using four different scanning techniques (manufacturer-suggested scanning strategy, cut-out rescan technique, simplified scanning technique, novel scanning technique). Scans were also performed by an expert operator in the field of digital dentistry. An operator with no experience in the field of intraoral scans performed 10 scans following each of the scanning strategy suggested by the manufacturer. The master model was scanned with an industrial high-resolution reference scanner to obtain a highly accurate digitized reference model. All the digital models were aligned with the reference model using a software aimed at comparing the STL files. A total of n = 300 scans were performed. Once the data were pooled, Medit i700 and Primescan obtained the best results in terms of both trueness and precision, showing no statistically significative differences (p > 0.05) to the first and the second scanning technique, Medit i700 scanner allowed to obtain the best values both in terms of trueness (24.4 ± 2.1 µm and 21.4 ± 12.9 µm, respectively) and precision compared to other IOS (23.0 ± 1.6 µm and 30.0 ± 18.0 µm, respectively). When considering the third scanning technique, Medit i700 recorded the best values in terms of trueness while Primescan recorded the best values in terms of precision (24.0 ± 2.7 µm and 26.8 ± 13.7 µm, respectively). When considering the two operators, significant differences between the two were found only with Medit i700 (p < 0.001). The examined IOS showed statistically significant differences in terms of trueness and precision. The used scanning strategy is a factor influencing the accuracy of IOS. Considering the expertise of the operators, clinically scanning strategies are not operative sensitive in terms of accuracy.

Maxillary dimensions and arch shape with palatally displaced canines.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the effect of palatally displaced canines on maxillary dimensions and arch shape. METHODS: Occlusal and skeletal landmarks were plotted on cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of 156 orthodontic patients: 78 with palatally displaced canines (PDC) (27 left, 28 right, and 23 bilateral) and 78 controls using Mimics™ (Materialise, Belgium). Arch forms were created, and arch width, depth, and skeletal dimensions were measured. T-test (P < 0.05) was used to compare the groups. Geometric Morphometrics (GM) analysis was used to compare the groups and to explore the pattern of covariation between two sets of landmarks. RESULTS: The unilateral PDC group showed an increased first premolar, second premolar, molar widths, and an increased molar depth. No significant difference was found in arch form. The skeletal measurements were generally larger in the PDC group, but the transverse measurements were the most significant. Discriminant Function Analysis (DFA) with cross-validation allowed an accurate classification of 85.9% of the control group and 66.7% of the PDC group. The Mahalanobis distance displayed significant differences among three combinations of groups. Strong covariance was found between the second premolar and all other landmarks. LIMITATIONS: The small sample sizes of the stratified groups precluded recognition of statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with unilateral PDC displayed significantly wider first, second premolar, and first molar widths, and increased first molar depths. There were no significant differences in arch form; however, GM showed significant differences between the groups and a prominent covariance function for the 2nd premolars.

Accuracy of photogrammetric imaging versus conventional impressions for complete arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: A comparative clinical study.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Clinical studies on the accuracy of the photogrammetric imaging technique for complete arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses are lacking. PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the accuracy (trueness) of photogrammetric imaging for complete arch implant-supported prostheses by comparing photogrammetric imaging with verified conventional splinted impressions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Completely edentulous arches with at least 4 implants were included. Both photogrammetric imaging and conventional splinted impressions were performed in each jaw. The conventional casts were verified and scanned by using a laboratory scanner as the control. The distances and angulations between different implants (interimplant distances and interimplant angulations) were measured in all photogrammetric and conventional standard tessellation language (STL) files by using a reverse-engineering software program. The distance deviations between the photogrammetric and conventional impressions of the same participant were calculated as the primary outcome, and the angular deviations were obtained as the secondary outcome with descriptive analyses. The comparison between distance deviations and the clinically acceptable level of deviations (150 µm) was conducted by using the 1-sample t test. The effect of interimplant distances, interimplant angulations, and jaw (maxilla or mandible) on deviations was analyzed by using the Spearman correlation analysis, Kruskal-Wallis test, or Student t test, depending on the type of data (α=0.05 for all tests). RESULTS: Fourteen edentulous jaws were included. The overall distance deviation of photogrammetric imaging was 70 ±57 µm, significantly lower than the clinically acceptable level of misfit (150 µm; P<.001). The overall angular deviation was 0.432 ±0.348 degrees. The distance deviations were correlated with interimplant distances with a correlation coefficient (r) of 0.371 (P=.002). Interimplant angulation was not correlated with distance or angular deviations (P=.914, P=.914). Jaw was not correlated with distance or angular deviations either (P=.190, P=.209). CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy (trueness) of photogrammetric imaging of complete arch implant-supported prostheses was within a clinically acceptable range of errors. Distance deviations increased with greater interimplant distances. Interimplant angulations and jaw (maxilla or mandible) had no significant effect on the accuracy of photogrammetric imaging.

Feasibility of using an intraoral scanner for a complete arch digital scan, part 2: A comparison of scan strategies.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Various strategies for intraoral scanners (IOSs) can be used to scan the oral cavity. However, research on the scan range that can be clinically is lacking. PURPOSE: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the 3-dimensional (3D) distortion of complete arch scans as part of the scan strategy and analyze the clinically recommended scan range. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A computer-aided design (CAD) reference model was obtained with an industrial scanner. A CAD test model was obtained by using 6 IOSs (TRIOS2, TRIOS3, CS3500, CS3600, i500, and Primescan) to apply 2 scan strategies and 2 dental laboratory scanners (DOF and E1) (N=15). All the teeth were segmented in the reference model by using 3D inspection software (Geomagic control X). The 3D analysis was performed by aligning the test model to the reference model and evaluating the root mean square values of all segmented teeth. The Mann-Whitney U-test was performed for a statistical comparison of the 2 scan strategies (α=.05), the Kruskal-Wallis test (α=.05) was used to compare the scanners, and the Mann-Whitney U-test and Bonferroni correction method were used as post hoc tests (α=.0017). RESULTS: The 8 scanners obtained significant differences in the root mean square values of all teeth (P<.001). The root mean square value of IOSs increased from the left maxillary second molar to the right maxillary second molar. The difference in the 2 scan strategies showed different patterns depending on the IOS. CONCLUSIONS: Scan strategy 2 improved the accuracy of the IOSs. TRIOS2 and CS3500 are for single crowns; TRIOS3, CS3600, and i500 are for short-span prostheses; and Primescan is for long-span prostheses.

Trueness of intraoral scanning of edentulous arches: A comparative clinical study.

PURPOSE: To compare the accuracy of intraoral scanning (IOS) of the edentulous arch with the hybrid protocol of cast digitization (CD), and to investigate the effect of arch type and area on trueness. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Participants that were edentulous in both arches were recruited. Two impression protocols were used; the IOS as the test protocol with an IOS device (TRIOS 4; 3Shape, Denmark), and the CD as the control, including tracing compound (TRACING STICKS; Kemdent, UK) for border molding, polyvinyl siloxane (Hydrorise Monophase; Zhermack, Italy) for impression, and cast digitization with a laboratory scanner (ceramill® map400, AMANNGIRRBACH, Germany). Scanned files were exported to a 3D inspection software (Geomagic Control X; 3D Systems, NC) for trueness analysis. The CD file (reference file) for each participant was split into 2 areas; the dynamic area representing the mobile tissues at the peripheral border, and the static area representing the rest of the arch. Statistical analyses were performed with 1-sample t-test for the difference between CD and IOS protocols, paired sample t-test for the difference between the static and dynamic areas for each arch, and an independent sample t-test for the difference between the maxillary and mandibular arches for each area, with α = 0.05. Effect size was calculated with Cohen's d (d), with 0.2 as small, 0.5 as medium, and 0.8 as large. RESULTS: A total of 21 participants were included. The difference between the IOS and CD protocol was significant for all subset comparisons (p < 0.001, d: 2.5-6.2, large effect size). Dynamic areas had lower trueness in comparison with static areas (p < 0.001, d = 4.57, large effect size for the maxillary arch, p < 0.001, d = 3.96, large effect size for the mandibular arch). Mandibular arch had lower trueness in comparison with the maxillary arch (p < 0.001, d = 1.45, large effect size for the static areas, p = 0.009, d = 0.85, large effect size for the dynamic areas, p < 0.001, d = 1.71, large effect size for all areas). Color difference map showed marked positive deviation in the buccal dynamic areas of both arches, and nonmatching areas with evident overstretching. CONCLUSIONS: While the IOS of edentulous arches could be feasible for attached mucosa, providing a functional shape for the peripheral border remains a challenge, with a thinner and more outward border for the IOS in comparison with the CD protocol. The IOS of the mandibular arch is more difficult and has lower trueness in comparison with the maxillary arch.

[A case of two-stage orthodontic treatment of skeletal Classâ ¡malocclusion with mandibular retrusion and maxillary dental arch stenosis].

This article reviewed two-stage orthodontic treatment of a patient with skeletal ClassⅡmalocclusion with mandibular retrusion and maxillary dental arch stenosis. The patient was also accompanied by premature loss of bilateral mandibular deciduous canines and mesialization of mandibular posterior teeth. The first-stage treatment mainly corrected the maxillary dental arch stenosis, maxillary anterior teeth protrusion, mandibular retrusion and skeletal ClassⅡmalocclusion, while the second-stage treatment mainly corrected the mesialization of mandibular posterior teeth and alignment of maxillary and mandibular dentition. The two-stage orthodontic treatment finally enabled the patient to achieve good dental arch shape, tooth alignment, skeletal face pattern and soft tissue profile.

Dental arch definition in computed tomographs using two semi-automatic methods.

Computed tomography is a widely used image examination in dental imaging that provides an accurate location of oral structures and features, including the dental arch, which is an important anatomical feature. This study proposes two new semi-automatic methods for arch definition in CTs, with minimal user effort. This study includes 25 CT examinations. The first method is based on the teeth pulps, and the second one is based on the whole mandible. The methods use thresholding and morphological operations to obtain the arches. The evaluation process includes two different metrics DTW and IoU. For both metrics, the initial results of M1 were very low, but the average performance of M2 can be considered high. The analysis showed that changing the input improves the M1 results substantially. The promising results presented here suggest that these methods can be used as auxiliary tools for the proposed task.