Validity of palatal superimposition of 3-dimensional digital models in cases treated with rapid maxillary expansion and maxillary protraction headgear

Abstract

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity of the 3-dimensional (3D) superimposition method of digital models in patients who received treatment with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and maxillary protraction headgear.MethodsThe material consisted of pre- and post-treatment maxillary dental casts and lateral cephalograms of 30 patients, who underwent RME and maxillary protraction headgear treatment. Digital models were superimposed using the palate as a reference area. The movement of the maxillary central incisor and the first molar was measured on superimposed cephalograms and 3D digital models. To determine whether any difference existed between the 2 measuring techniques, intra-class correlation (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots were analyzed.ResultsThe measurements on the 3D digital models and cephalograms showed a very high correlation in the antero-posterior direction (ICC, 0.956 for central incisor and 0.941 for first molar) and a moderate correlation in the vertical direction (ICC, 0.748 for central incisor and 0.717 for first molar).ConclusionsThe 3D model superimposition method using the palate as a reference area is as clinically reliable for assessing antero-posterior tooth movement as cephalometric superimposition, even in cases treated with orthopedic appliances, such as RME and maxillary protraction headgear.

Palatal volume and area assessment on digital casts generated from cone-beam computed tomography scans

“…24 Consequently, the automated process of best-fit superimposition seems to have the least possible error. 17,23 Moreover, using the same gingival plane for both pre-and postrecords can give more comparable results. Nevertheless, volume measurements calculated based on the superimposition of pre-and postdigital casts using the same reference plane has never been proposed.…”

“…17 Therefore, volume assessment does not require indirect calculations such as those produced geometrically or by reverse engineering. 25 Instead, it simply follows from the direct selection of space inside the borders that have been selected.…”

“…Superimposition was performed using a fully automated surface-best fit of the whole area of preand postexpansion palatal surfaces after the exclusion of teeth. 1,16,17 The two superimposed CBCT scans of digital models were then recorded as linked files and used as one ( Figure 1). After this step, the mesh was no longer used, and all measurements were carried out on the linked superimposed volume data.…”

Three-dimensional analysis of tooth movements after palatal miniscrew-supported molar distalization

“…15 The validity of this method was evaluated in extraction patients 22 and even in patients treated with orthopedic appliances such as rapid maxillary expansion and maxillary protraction headgear. 30 The authors of these studies concluded that the method is clinically reliable. It was reported that using digital models to evaluate dental changes after distalization treatment is reliable and has minor measurement differences when compared with conventional superimposition methods.…”

3D cephalometry and artificial intelligence

“…2,12 In the literature, most authors prefer superimposing on the anterior mucosal folds of the palate, the palatine rugae, and choose it as a reference area because it is a stable site 3,22,23,2,1,38 , but others maintain a more critical perspective. 41,14 .…”