The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A reliable method for evaluating upper molar distalization: Superimposition of three-dimensional digital models

  • Nalcaci, Ruhi (Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Karadeniz Technical University) ;
  • Kocoglu-Altan, Ayse Burcu (Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Kocaeli University) ;
  • Bicakci, Ali Altug (Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Gaziosmanpasa University) ;
  • Ozturk, Firat (Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Pamukkale University) ;
  • Babacan, Hasan (Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Pamukkale University)
  • Received : 2014.04.21
  • Accepted : 2014.11.13
  • Published : 2015.03.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of measurements obtained after the superimposition of three-dimensional (3D) digital models by comparing them with those obtained from lateral cephalometric radiographs and photocopies of plaster models for the evaluation of upper molar distalization. Methods: Data were collected from plaster models and lateral cephalometric radiographs of 20 Class II patients whose maxillary first molars were distalized with an intraoral distalizer. The posterior movements of the maxillary first molars were evaluated using lateral cephalometric radiographs (group CP), photocopies of plaster models (group PH), and digitized 3D models (group TD). Additionally, distalization and expansion of the other teeth and the degrees of molar rotation were measured in group PH and group TD and compared between the two groups. Results: No significant difference was observed regarding the amount of molar distalization among the three groups. A comparison of the aforementioned parameters between group PH and group TD did not reveal any significant difference. Conclusions: 3D digital models are reliable to assess the results of upper molar distalization and can be considered a valid alternative to conventional measurement methods.

Keywords

References

  1. Leifert MF, Leifert MM, Efstratiadis SS, Cangialosi TJ. Comparison of space analysis evaluations with digital models and plaster dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:16.e1-4.
  2. Quimby ML, Vig KW, Rashid RG, Firestone AR. The accuracy and reliability of measurements made on computer-based digital models. Angle Orthod 2004;74:298-303.
  3. Stevens DR, Flores-Mir C, Nebbe B, Raboud DW, Heo G, Major PW. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of plaster vs digital study models: comparison of peer assessment rating and Bolton analysis and their constituent measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;129:794-803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.08.023
  4. Horton HM, Miller JR, Gaillard PR, Larson BE. Technique comparison for efficient orthodontic tooth measurements using digital models. Angle Orthod 2010;80:254-61. https://doi.org/10.2319/041709-219.1
  5. Fleming PS, Marinho V, Johal A. Orthodontic measurements on digital study models compared with plaster models: a systematic review. Orthod Craniofac Res 2011;14:1-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-6343.2010.01503.x
  6. Sjogren AP, Lindgren JE, Huggare JA. Orthodontic study cast analysis--reproducibility of recordings and agreement between conventional and 3D virtual measurements. J Digit Imaging 2010;23:482-92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-009-9211-y
  7. Zilberman O, Huggare JA, Parikakis KA. Evaluation of the validity of tooth size and arch width measurements using conventional and three-dimensional virtual orthodontic models. Angle Orthod 2003;73:301-6.
  8. Santoro M, Galkin S, Teredesai M, Nicolay OF, Cangialosi TJ. Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:101-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00152-5
  9. Gracco A, Buranello M, Cozzani M, Siciliani G. Digital and plaster models: a comparison of measurements and times. Prog Orthod 2007;8:252-9.
  10. Nalcaci R, Bicakci AA, Ozan F. Noncompliance screw supported maxillary molar distalization in a parallel manner. Korean J Orthod 2010;40:250-9. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2010.40.4.250
  11. Kim SJ, Chun YS, Jung SH, Park SH. Three dimensional analysis of tooth movement using different types of maxillary molar distalization appliances. Korean J Orthod 2008;38:376-87. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2008.38.6.376
  12. Ashmore JL, Kurland BF, King GJ, Wheeler TT, Ghafari J, Ramsay DS. A 3-dimensional analysis of molar movement during headgear treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002;121:18-29. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2002.120687
  13. Bjork A, Skieller V. Normal and abnormal growth of the mandible. A synthesis of longitudinal cephalometric implant studies over a period of 25 years. Eur J Orthod 1983;5:1-46. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/5.1.1
  14. Champagne M. Reliability of measurements from photocopies of study models. J Clin Orthod 1992;26:648-50.
  15. Jang I, Tanaka M, Koga Y, Iijima S, Yozgatian JH, Cha BK, et al. A novel method for the assessment of three-dimensional tooth movement during orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod 2009;79:447-53. https://doi.org/10.2319/042308-225.1
  16. Lai EH, Yao CC, Chang JZ, Chen I, Chen YJ. Threedimensional dental model analysis of treatment outcomes for protrusive maxillary dentition: comparison of headgear, miniscrew, and miniplate skeletal anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:636-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.05.017
  17. Cha BK, Lee JY, Jost-Brinkmann PG, Yoshida N. Analysis of tooth movement in extraction cases using three-dimensional reverse engineering technology. Eur J Orthod 2007;29:325-31. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjm019
  18. McGuinness NJ, Stephens CD. Storage of orthodontic study models in hospital units in the U.K. Br J Orthod 1992;19:227-32. https://doi.org/10.1179/bjo.19.3.227
  19. Thiruvenkatachari B, Al-Abdallah M, Akram NC, Sandler J, O'Brien K. Measuring 3-dimensional tooth movement with a 3-dimensional surface laser scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 135:480-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.03.040
  20. Kuroda T, Motohashi N, Tominaga R, Iwata K. Three-dimensional dental cast analyzing system using laser scanning. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996;110:365-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(96)70036-7
  21. Hajeer MY, Millett DT, Ayoub AF, Siebert JP. Applications of 3D imaging in orthodontics: part I. J Orthod 2004;31:62-70. https://doi.org/10.1179/146531204225011346
  22. Mavropoulos A, Karamouzos A, Kiliaridis S, Papadopoulos MA. Efficiency of noncompliance simultaneous first and second upper molar distalization: a three-dimensional tooth movement analysis. Angle Orthod 2005;75:532-9.
  23. Bell A, Ayoub AF, Siebert P. Assessment of the accuracy of a three-dimensional imaging system for archiving dental study models. J Orthod 2003;30: 219-23. https://doi.org/10.1093/ortho/30.3.219
  24. Keating AP, Knox J, Bibb R, Zhurov AI. A comparison of plaster, digital and reconstructed study model accuracy. J Orthod 2008;35:191-201. https://doi.org/10.1179/146531207225022626
  25. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM. Orthodontic diagnosis: the development of a problem list. In: Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM, eds. Contemporary orthodontics. 4th ed. St. Louis, Mo: Mosby Elsevier;2007. p. 167-233.
  26. Choi JI, Cha BK, Jost-Brinkmann PG, Choi DS, Jang IS. Validity of palatal superimposition of 3-dimensional digital models in cases treated with rapid maxillary expansion and maxillary protraction headgear. Korean J Orthod 2012;42:235-41. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2012.42.5.235
  27. Bailey LT, Esmailnejad A, Almeida MA. Stability of the palatal rugae as landmarks for analysis of dental casts in extraction and nonextraction cases. Angle Orthod 1996;66:73-8.
  28. Hoggan BR, Sadowsky C. The use of palatal rugae for the assessment of anteroposterior tooth movements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;119:482-8. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2001.113001
  29. Simmons JD, Moore RN, Erickson LC. A longitudinal study of anteroposterior growth changes in the palatine rugae. J Dent Res 1987;66:1512-5. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345870660092001
  30. Choi DS, Jeong YM, Jang I, Jost-Brinkmann PG, Cha BK. Accuracy and reliability of palatal superimposition of three-dimensional digital models. Angle Orthod 2010;80:497-503.

Cited by

  1. Novel Method for Superposing 3D Digital Models for Monitoring Orthodontic Tooth Movement vol.46, pp.8, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-018-2029-3
  2. A novel method for superimposition and measurements on maxillary digital 3D models-studies on validity and reliability vol.40, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjx029
  3. The effect of regular dental cast artifacts on the 3D superimposition of serial digital maxillary dental models vol.9, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-46887-1
  4. Digital Models: Comparison of Scanning Angulations and Superimposition vol.10, pp.8, 2015, https://doi.org/10.4236/ojst.2020.108021
  5. Assessment of techniques used for superimposition of maxillary and mandibular 3D surface models to evaluate tooth movement: a systematic review vol.42, pp.5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjz075
  6. 3D Scanners in Orthodontics-Current Knowledge and Future Perspectives-A Systematic Review vol.18, pp.3, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18031121