Comparison of the accuracy of digital face scans obtained by two different scanners:

Pellitteri, Federica; Brucculeri, Luca; Spedicato, Giorgio Alfredo; Lombardo, Luca

doi:10.2319/092720-823.1

Cited by 22 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Calculating RMS differences is the most commonly applied trueness analysis in digital dentistry [42]. However, the effect of different software programs to calculate RMS values between corresponding datasets is not clear [43][44][45]. The influence of the build angle on the fabrication of 3D-printed crowns has been shown in various studies [14,18,25,26,29].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Printing Layer Thickness on the Trueness and Margin Quality of 3D-Printed Interim Dental Crowns

Çakmak

Cuellar²,

Dönmez

et al. 2021

Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The information in the literature on the effect of printing layer thickness on interim 3D-printed crowns is limited. In the present study, the effect of layer thickness on the trueness and margin quality of 3D-printed composite resin crowns was investigated and compared with milled crowns. The crowns were printed in 3 different layer thicknesses (20, 50, and 100 μm) by using a hybrid resin based on acrylic esters with inorganic microfillers or milled from polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) discs and digitized with an intraoral scanner (test scans). The compare tool of the 3D analysis software was used to superimpose the test scans and the computer-aided design file by using the manual alignment tool and to virtually separate the surfaces. Deviations at different surfaces on crowns were calculated by using root mean square (RMS). Margin quality of crowns was examined under a stereomicroscope and graded. The data were evaluated with one-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests. The layer thickness affected the trueness and margin quality of 3D-printed interim crowns. Milled crowns had higher trueness on intaglio and intaglio occlusal surfaces than 100 μm-layer thickness crowns. Milled crowns had the highest margin quality, while 20 μm and 100 μm layer thickness printed crowns had the lowest. The quality varied depending on the location of the margin.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Printing Layer Thickness on the Trueness and Margin Quality of 3D-Printed Interim Dental Crowns

Çakmak

Cuellar²,

Dönmez

et al. 2021

Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Geomagic X Control allows detection automatically of discrepancies in micrometers thanks to the “3D comparison” tool, both positive (expansion) and negative (contraction). Deviations are viewed on a color-coded superimposed image considering the discrepancy range from 0.5 to 0 mm and from 0 to −0.5 mm highly reproducible [ 17 ] (Fig. 1 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As the literature reported, to measure scans accuracy, the data collected (.stl files) of both complete arch of each patient were imported into surface-matching software Geomagic X Control (3D Systems Inc, Rock Hill, SC) [17][18][19]. Each scan was superimposed with the scanned stone cast (162 superimpositions) using first the software's initial matching algorithm tool (A.V.)…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative analysis of intraoral scanners accuracy using 3D software: an in vivo study

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The purpose of the present in vivo study was to compare the accuracy, in terms of trueness, between full-arch digital impressions of different intraoral scanning systems, using as a reference the ideality of the conventional impression technique. Methods Polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) two-step technique impressions of 27 subjects were taken, and the stone casts were scanned using desktop scanners R500 3Shape. For each arch, in vivo scans were taken with intraoral scanners Carestream CS3600, CEREC Omnicam and Trios 3Shape. All the files were compared, superimposing them on the reference model to calculate the total 3D and 2D deviations. The efficiency of the digital and conventional workflows was evaluated by measuring the work time in minutes. Statistical analyses were performed using R software (R Core Team 2020) with a p-value < 0.05. Results The three intraoral scanners differed from the PVS impression by differences of the order of 100–200 µm, and there was a trend of greater imprecision in the molar area in both dental arches. In comparison with PVS technique, CEREC tended to reduce the size of the impression, Trios presented the trend of greater precision, and Carestream showed minor differences the transversal distance. The areas of greatest discrepancy both in excess and in defect with respect to the PVS impression were the molar areas and incisal margins. Trios 3Shape recorded the shortest times and therefore with a more performing speed. Conclusion The Trios 3Shape was found to be the most accurate single-tooth scanner, while the Carestream CS 3600 showed better inter-arch diameter performance compared to PVS impressions. The 3D and 2D analyses showed a trend of greater distortion of the impressions compared to the conventional one in the molar region.

show abstract

“…Soft tissue images of the face are important records for evaluating the maxillofacial area in many fields such as orthodontics, orthognathic surgery, and facial plastic surgery, and are used for diagnostic processing, treatment planning, and outcome analysis, among others. The application of 3D scanning methods in healthcare, especially Cone Beam Computerized Tomography (CBCT) imaging in the field of maxillofacial surgery and orthodontics, has expanded significantly over the last decade [3,4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Smartphone-Based Facial Scanning as a Viable Tool for Facially Driven Orthodontics?

Thurzo¹,

Strunga²,

Havlínová³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current paradigm shift in orthodontic treatment planning is based on facially driven diagnostics. This requires an affordable, convenient, and non-invasive solution for face scanning. Therefore, utilization of smartphones` TrueDepth sensors is very tempting. TrueDepth refers to front-facing cameras with a dot projector in Apple devices that provide real-time depth data in addition to visual information. There are several applications that tout themselves as accurate solutions for 3D scanning of the face in dentistry. Their clinical accuracy has been uncertain. This study focuses on evaluating the accuracy of the Bellus3D Dental Pro app, which uses Apple's TrueDepth sensor. The app reconstructs a virtual, high-resolution version of the face, which is available for download as a 3D object. In this paper, sixty TrueDepth scans of the face were compared to sixty corresponding facial surfaces segmented from CBCT. Difference maps were created for each pair and evaluated in specific facial regions. The results confirmed statistically significant differences in some facial regions in amplitudes greater than 3 mm, suggesting that current technology has limited applicability for clinical use. The clinical utilization of facial scanning for orthodontic evaluation, which does not require accuracy in the lip region below 3 mm, can be considered.

show abstract

Comparison of the accuracy of digital face scans obtained by two different scanners:

Cited by 22 publications

References 18 publications

Effect of Printing Layer Thickness on the Trueness and Margin Quality of 3D-Printed Interim Dental Crowns

Effect of Printing Layer Thickness on the Trueness and Margin Quality of 3D-Printed Interim Dental Crowns

Comparative analysis of intraoral scanners accuracy using 3D software: an in vivo study

Smartphone-Based Facial Scanning as a Viable Tool for Facially Driven Orthodontics?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About