Accuracy and efficiency of full-arch digitalization and 3D printing: A comparison between desktop model scanners, an intraoral scanner, a CBCT model scan, and stereolithographic 3D printing

Quintessence International

Volumn 48, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 41-50

  Wesemann, Christian ^a   Muallah, Jonas ^a   Mah, James ^b   Bumann, Axel ^c  

^a CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA   (United States)

^c Director of 3D Imaging   (Germany)

Author keywords

3D printed models; Accuracy; CBCT model scan; Desktop model scanner; Digitalization; Full arch scans; Intraoral scanner

Indexed keywords

ANATOMY AND HISTOLOGY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; CONE BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; DENTAL IMPRESSION; DENTAL PROCEDURE; DENTAL TECHNOLOGY; DEVICES; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HUMAN; ORTHODONTICS; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; SOFTWARE; THREE DIMENSIONAL PRINTING; TOOTH ARCH; WORKFLOW;

COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN; CONE-BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; DENTAL ARCH; DENTAL IMPRESSION TECHNIQUE; DENTAL MODELS; DENTAL PROSTHESIS DESIGN; HUMANS; ORTHODONTICS; PRINTING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; SOFTWARE; TECHNOLOGY, DENTAL; WORKFLOW;

EID: 85009423203     PISSN: 00336572     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3290/j.qi.a37130     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Rheude B, Sadowsky PL, Ferriera A, Jacobson A. An evaluation of the use of digital study models in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Angle Orthod 2005;75: 300-304.
2. Vandeweghe S, Vervack V, Dierens M, De Bruyn H. Accuracy of digital impressions of multiple dental implants: an in vitro study (Epub ahead of print, 6 May 2016). Clin Oral Implants Res doi: 10.1111/clr.12853.
3. Grunheid T, McCarthy SD, Larson BE. Clinical use of a direct chairside oral scanner: an assessment of accuracy, time, and patient acceptance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014;146: 673-682.
4. Patzelt SB, Emmanouilidi A, Stampf S, Strub JR, Att W. Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral scanners. Clin Oral Investig 2014;18: 1687-1694.
5. Hayashi K, Sachdeva AU, Saitoh S, Lee SP, Kubota T, Mizoguchi I. Assessment of the accuracy and reliability of new 3-dimensional scanning devices. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144: 619-625.
6. Lightheart KG, English JD, Kau CH, et al. Surface analysis of study models generated from OrthoCAD and cone-beam computed tomography imaging. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012;141: 686-693.
7. Tarazona B, Llamas JM, Cibrian R, Gandia JL, Paredes V. A comparison between dental measurements taken from CBCT models and those taken from a digital method. Eur J Orthod 2013;35: 1-6.
8. Ender A, Mehl A. Full arch scans: conventional versus digital impressions: an in-vitro study. Int J Comput Dent 2011;14: 11-21.
9. Akyalcin S, Dyer DJ, English JD, Sar C. Comparison of 3-dimensional dental models from different sources: diagnostic accuracy and surface registration analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144: 831-837.
10. Ender A, Mehl A. In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions. Quintessence Int 2015;46: 9-17.
11. Su TS, Sun J. Comparison of repeatability between intraoral digital scanner and extraoral digital scanner: an in-vitro study. J Prosthodont Res 2015;59: 236-242.
12. Güth JF, Runkel C, Beuer F, Stimmelmayr M, EdelhoffD, Keul C. Accuracy of five intraoral scanners compared to indirect digitalization (Epub ahead of print, 12 Jul 2016). Clin Oral Investig.
13. Ender A, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent 2013;109: 121-128.
14. Flugge TV, Schlager S, Nelson K, Nahles S, Metzger MC. Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144: 471-478.
15. van der Meer WJ, Andriessen FS, Wismeijer D, Ren Y. Application of intra-oral dental scanners in the digital workflow of implantology. PLoS One 2012;7:e43312.
16. Bishara SE, Jakobsen JR, Treder J, Nowak A. Arch width changes from 6 weeks to 45 years of age. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;111: 401-409.
17. Müller P, Ender A, Joda T, Katsoulis J. Impact of digital intraoral scan strategies on the impression accuracy using the TRIOS Pod scanner. Quintessence Int 2016;47: 343-349.
18. Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology. International vocabulary of metrology: Basic and general concepts and associated terms (VIM), 3rd edition. JGCM, 2012: 37-39.
19. Baumgaertel S, Palomo JM, Palomo L, Hans MG. Reliability and accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography dental measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136: 19-25.
20. Lascala CA, Panella J, Marques MM. Analysis of the accuracy of linear measurements obtained by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT-NewTom). Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2004;33: 291-294.
21. Spoor CF, Zonneveld FW, Macho GA. Linear measurements of cortical bone and dental enamel by computed tomography: applications and problems. Am J Phys Anthropol 1993;91: 469-484.
22. Tarazona-Alvarez P, Romero-Millan J, Penarrocha-Oltra D, Fuster-Torres MA, Tarazona B, Penarrocha-Diago M. Comparative study of mandibular linear measurements obtained by cone beam computed tomography and digital calipers. J Clin Exp Dent 2014;6:e271-e274.
23. Casko JS, Vaden JL, Kokich VG, et al. Objective grading system for dental casts and panoramic radiographs. American Board of Orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;114: 589-599.
24. Jang KS, Kim YS. Comparison of oral sensory function in complete denture and implant-supported prosthesis wearers. J Oral Rehabil 2001;28: 220-225.
25. Radlanski R-J. Curriculum Orale Struktur-und Entwicklungsbiologie. Berlin: Quintessenz, 2011.
26. Wichelhaus A. Kieferorthopädie-Therapie Band 1 (Grundlegende Behandlungskonzepte). Stuttgart: Thieme, 2012.