Identification of a stable reference area for superimposing mandibular digital models

An, Ki-Yong; Jang, Insan; Choi, Dong-Soon; Jost‐Brinkmann, Paul‐Georg; Cha, Bong‐Kuen

doi:10.1007/s00056-015-0310-8

Cited by 30 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The buccal and lingual alveolar surfaces, near the dentition, seem to be inappropriate as reference areas for superimposing three-dimensional mandibular digital models of patients without a mandibular torus. [14] In this study, intermolar width did not significantly increase, although this was expected to occur because the support of a more vestibular force vector should have produced a vertical position of the mandibular molars, as has been described in other studies. [10,11,15] The present study did not find such an increase; however, our retention period was 6 months, and the T2 documentation was performed 1 year after the initial record-sufficient time for the maxillary arch to expand the lower teeth.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 62%

Changes in the mandibular arch after rapid maxillary expansion in children: A three-dimensional analysis using digital models

Pacheco

Franco

Antelo

et al. 2018

European Journal of General Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maxillary posterior crossbite is detectable in the deciduous dentition of nearly 20.81% of the child population. [1,2] This transverse discrepancy does not self-correct, whether it is functional or skeletal, unilateral, or bilateral. [3][4][5] Rapid maxillary expansion (RME) is indicated in patients with posterior crossbite to correct the transversal discrepancy between arches by opening the midpalatal suture and expanding the maxillary molars. [6] The effects of this procedure on the mandibular arch are not well understood. Some researchers believe that the intermolar width and arch perimeter increase due to better positioning of the tongue over the mandibular arch, leading to a physiological expansion as a result of the RME. Others contend that no association exists between the procedures.Measurements performed on digital casts have been described as reliable for orthodontic purposes, with the advantages of consuming less storage space and being easy to manipulate for the study. [7,8] The advantages of digital casts include the possibility of more precise analysis, the reduced need for storage, and the ease of handling, sharing, and forwarding them. [9] The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate and compare the changes in distance between mandibular first molars and mandibular arch perimeters, before and after RME, using digital models. [9]

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 62%

Changes in the mandibular arch after rapid maxillary expansion in children: A three-dimensional analysis using digital models

Pacheco

Franco

Antelo

et al. 2018

European Journal of General Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For mandibular superimposition, the most actual approaches use CBCT data [ 47 – 50 ], which is however ethically unacceptable for orthodontic retention surveillance. Only one study [ 51 ] investigated the superimposition of different anatomic mandibular areas depicted on digital casts and found acceptable accuracy in patients with bilateral mandibular tori only. Due to the fact that the prevalence of mandibular tori is only about 25% and varies with ethnicity [ 52 , 53 ], to date there is no reliable methodology for superimposition using stable structures in the mandible [ 46 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D-analysis of unwanted tooth movements despite bonded orthodontic retainers: a pilot study

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Recently, reports of unwanted tooth movements despite intact orthodontic bonded retainers have increased. These movements are not subject to relapse but are classified as a new developed malocclusion. The aims of the present pilot study were to analyze the prevalence of unwanted tooth movements despite intact bonded cuspid-to-cuspid retainers and to identify possible predisposing factors. Materials and methods Plaster casts of all patients finishing orthodontic treatment during three consecutive years were assessed before treatment (T0), after multibracket appliance debonding (T1) and after two years of retention (T2). After multibracket appliance treatment, all patients received a cuspid-to-cuspid flexible spiral wire retainer bonded to each tooth of the retained segment in the upper and lower jaw. The study group (SG) consisted of 44 patients (16 male, 28 female) with tooth movements (T1–T2) of the retained segment despite intact bonded cuspid-to-cuspid retainer and the control group (CG) of 43 patients (19 male, 24 female) without unwanted tooth movements. The casts of the SG were digitized, superimposed and measured. Using the Chi-square test, Fisher´s exact test and Mann–Whitney-U-test (p < 0.05), mandibular plane angle, incisor proclination, oral dysfunctions or habits (T0) and intercanine distance, overjet and interincisal relationship (T0, T1, T2) were compared between SG and CG. Results The prevalence of patients with unwanted tooth movements in one or both jaws was 27.0%. Maxillary retainers were affected more often (20.9%) than mandibular retainers (14.1%). The median amount of tooth movements was 0 to 0.66 mm with large interindividual variations. Oral dysfunctions or habits at T0, such as a lack of interincisal contact at all time points, were associated with unwanted tooth movements. Conclusion Unwanted tooth movements occurred more often with maxillary than mandibular retainers. Patients with oral dysfunctions/habits and without interincisal contact had a higher prevalence of unwanted tooth movements.

show abstract

“…After the model superimposition on the rugae region, all the oral tissues were digitally removed leaving only the outline of the maxillary dentition. It was not possible to use stable references for superimposition on the mandibular models of the virtual setups due to the absence of a stable structure such as the mandibular torus [1] in the analyzed sample. In the WSBF and PRBF superimposition methods the same algorithm was used (best fit) in the software program.…”

Section: Data Acquisitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using a model superimposition method improves the assessment of displacements in the three planes of space. Various studies that compared dental movements in progress models proposed a superimposition method using stable structures as a reference such as the palatal rugae in the maxillary model [7,8,10,19] or the mandibular torus in the mandibular model [1]. The studies which compared therapeutic virtual setups with the posttreatment models used the best fit alignment technique for model superimposition using the dentition as a reference [13,[16][17][18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of the model superimposition method on the assessment of accuracy and predictability of setup models

Camardella

Vilella

Breuning³

et al. 2021

J Orofac Orthop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different superimposition methods on the accuracy and predictability of conventional and virtual diagnostic setups. Materials and methods Ten finished cases were used to make a conventional setup and a virtual setup. Second molars were not moved in the two setup situations to allow a reference for superimposition. Conventional and virtual setups were superimposed and compared by second molar registration and the whole surface best fit method (WSBF). Conventional and virtual setups were compared to the posttreatment models with WSBF and palatal rugae best fit (PRBF). Anterior, intermediate, and posterior regions of the dental arches were compared. The paired t-test was used to compare the mean differences between conventional and virtual setups, posttreatment models and both conventional and virtual setups by the WSBF method, and between maxillary posttreatment and virtual setup models using the WSBF and PRBF methods. Results Conventional and virtual setups differed depending on the two superimposition methods used. Superimposition of the posttreatment models and both setups using WSBF presented no statistically significant differences. There were statistically significant differences between posttreatment and virtual setup models using WSBF and PRBF superimposition methods. Conclusions The model superimposition method influenced the assessment of accuracy and predictability of setup models. There were statistically significant differences between the maxillary posttreatment and virtual setup models using the WSBF and the PRBF superimposition methods. It is important to establish stable structures to evaluate the accuracy and predictability of setup models.

show abstract

Identification of a stable reference area for superimposing mandibular digital models

Cited by 30 publications

References 18 publications

Changes in the mandibular arch after rapid maxillary expansion in children: A three-dimensional analysis using digital models

Changes in the mandibular arch after rapid maxillary expansion in children: A three-dimensional analysis using digital models

3D-analysis of unwanted tooth movements despite bonded orthodontic retainers: a pilot study

The influence of the model superimposition method on the assessment of accuracy and predictability of setup models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About