Impact of the number of registration points for replacement of three-dimensional computed tomography images in dental areas using three-dimensional light-scanned images of dental models

Impact of number of registration points on the positional accuracy of a prosthetic treatment plan incorporated into a cone beam computed tomography scan by surface scan registration: An in vitro study

“…First described clinically by Gateno et at, digital scan registration was introduced as a way to streamline the implant planning process, which enables the evaluation of the planned restoration, underlying bony structures, and associated soft tissues simultaneously (Gateno, Xia, Teichgraeber, & Rosen, ; Joda, Brägger, & Gallucci, ; Joda & Gallucci, ; Worthington et al, ; Yilmaz, ). Since the dentition may be obscured on CBCT scans due to the presence of scatter inducing metallic restorations or orthodontic brackets, the presence of the digital scan in conjunction with the CBCT scan allows for improved visualization of the teeth (Choi, Kim, Lee, & Kang, ; Flügge et al, ; Nkenke et al, ; Rangel, Maal, Bergé, & Kuijpers‐Jagtman, ; Widman et al, ; Worthington et al, ; Ye et al, ). Image registration may also overcome some of the complications associated with radiographic templates such as improper seating, poor acrylic mixing, and dimensional change of the acrylic, as the need for such templates is reduced (Jamjoom, Kim, McGlumphy, et al, ; Ritter et al, ; Widman et al, ; Yilmaz, ).…”

“…Registration commonly utilizes the iterative closest point algorithm (ICP), an algorithm used for registration, that identifies matching points on both data sets and calculates the most accurate alignment possible between them (Becker, Wilmes, Grandjean, & Drescher, ; Kim et al, ; Lin et al, ; Scherer, ). Registration can be achieved using marker‐based or marker‐free processes (Choi et al, ; Kim et al, ). Marker‐based registrations require the use of fiducial markers usually incorporated in a template or appliance to perform the registration (Becker et al, ; Choi et al, ; Gateno et al, ; Kim et al, ; Rangel et al, ; Swennen, Barth, Eulzer, & Schutyser, ; Swennen et al, ; Uechi et al, ).…”

“…Marker‐based registrations require the use of fiducial markers usually incorporated in a template or appliance to perform the registration (Becker et al, ; Choi et al, ; Gateno et al, ; Kim et al, ; Rangel et al, ; Swennen, Barth, Eulzer, & Schutyser, ; Swennen et al, ; Uechi et al, ). Marker‐free methods use anatomical landmarks and structures to serve as references when performing the registration (Choi et al, ; Jamjoom, Kim, Lee, et al, ; Jamjoom, Kim, McGlumphy, et al, ). Marker‐free registration can be further categorized into surface‐based or point‐based methods (Choi et al, ; Joda et al, ).…”

“…Marker‐free methods use anatomical landmarks and structures to serve as references when performing the registration (Choi et al, ; Jamjoom, Kim, Lee, et al, ; Jamjoom, Kim, McGlumphy, et al, ). Marker‐free registration can be further categorized into surface‐based or point‐based methods (Choi et al, ; Joda et al, ). The surface‐based registration is generally automatic and relies on matching surfaces on regions selected manually, whereas the point‐based registration relies on the selection of identifiable landmarks such as cusp tips and line angles on both data sets (Choi et al, ; Jamjoom, Kim, McGlumphy, et al, ; Joda et al, ; Lin et al, ).…”

“…Although the accuracy of point‐based registration method has been studied, the protocols of these methods have not been sufficiently investigated (Choi et al, ; Jamjoom, Kim, McGlumphy, et al, ). Three registration points have been recommended as a minimum for point‐based registration, however, that figure has not been adequately validated and the data on accuracy of point‐based registration according to number of registration points is limited (Lin et al, ; Rangel et al, ).…”