Comparison of 2 root surface area measurement methods: 3-dimensional laser scanning and cone-beam computed tomography

Abstract

PurposeThe aim of this study was to compare the use of 3-dimensional (3D) laser scanning and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) as methods of root surface measurement.Materials and MethodsThirty teeth (15 maxillary first premolars and 15 mandibular first premolars) from 8 patients who required extractions for orthodontic treatment were selected. Before extraction, pre-treatment CBCT images of all the patients were recorded. First, a CBCT image was imported into simulation software (Mimics version 15.01; Materialise, Leuven, Belgium) and the root surface area of each tooth was calculated using 3-Matic (version 7.01, Materialise, Leuven, Belgium). After extraction, all the teeth were scanned and the root surface area of each extracted tooth was calculated. The root surface areas calculated using these 2 measurement methods were analyzed using the paired t-test (P<.05). Correlations between the 2 methods were determined by calculating the Pearson correlation coefficient. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess intraobserver reliability.ResultsThe root surface area measurements (230.11±41.97 mm2) obtained using CBCT were slightly greater than those (229.31±42.46 mm2) obtained using 3D laser scanning, but not significantly (P=.425). A high Pearson correlation coefficient was found between the CBCT and the 3D laser scanner measurements. The intraobserver ICC was 1.000 for 3D laser scanning and 0.990 for CBCT.ConclusionThis study presents a novel CBCT approach for measuring the root surface area; this technique can be used for estimating the root surface area of non-extracted teeth.

Orthodontics and dental anatomy: Three-dimensional scanner contribution

“…Difference between mandibular central and lateral incisor is about 7.6% which is less than the values found in the literature[ 15 16 17 ]…”

“… Difference between maxillary first and second premolar is not significant (around 3%). It does not dictate in itself the systematic avulsion of second premolar instead of the first as advocated by some orthodontic schools On the other hand, difference between first and second mandibular premolar is more important (around 14%) and justifying the removal of first premolar rather than the second Difference between mandibular central and lateral incisor is about 7.6% which is less than the values found in the literature[ 15 16 17 ] First and second lower molar displayed almost same volume. …”

Tooth Root Surface Area Calculation in Cone-Beam CT via Deep Segmentation

“…It can only be done by manual selection. Tasanapanont (Tasanapanont et al, 2017) used Mimics software to calculate the RSA on CBCT. In order to identify details of tooth roots, they found that multiple points along the cementoenamel junction were created below the convex cervical third of the crown, where the smooth surface of the crown changed into the rough surface of the root.…”

Root surface areas of maxillary permanent teeth in anterior normal overbite and anterior open bite assessed using cone-beam computed tomography

“…Following the method of Tasanapanont et al, 3 the patients' Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine files, obtained by CBCT, was converted to the stereolithography (STL) format using Mimics Research version 17.0 (Materialise, Leuven, Belgium). To reconstruct the areas of interest, the threshold value for the tooth region was predefined.…”

“… 2 Nevertheless, the root surface area of non-extracted teeth, which is important for orthodontic treatment, cannot be measured using any of these methods. Hence, Tasanapanont et al 3 presented a novel cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) approach for measuring root surface area, and suggested that this technique could be used to assess the root surface area of non-extracted teeth.…”