The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

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

DOI QR Code

Accuracy of Bolton analysis measured in laser scanned digital models compared with plaster models (gold standard) and cone-beam computer tomography images

  • Kim, Jooseong (Department of Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Alberta) ;
  • Lagravere, Manuel O. (Department of Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Alberta)
  • Received : 2015.01.27
  • Accepted : 2015.08.25
  • Published : 2016.01.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of Bolton analysis obtained from digital models scanned with the Ortho Insight three-dimensional (3D) laser scanner system to those obtained from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images and traditional plaster models. Methods: CBCT scans and plaster models were obtained from 50 patients. Plaster models were scanned using the Ortho Insight 3D laser scanner; Bolton ratios were calculated with its software. CBCT scans were imported and analyzed using AVIZO software. Plaster models were measured with a digital caliper. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: Anterior and overall Bolton ratios obtained by the three different modalities exhibited excellent agreement (> 0.970). The mean differences between the scanned digital models and physical models and between the CBCT images and scanned digital models for overall Bolton ratios were $0.41{\pm}0.305%$ and $0.45{\pm}0.456%$, respectively; for anterior Bolton ratios, $0.59{\pm}0.520%$ and $1.01{\pm}0.780%$, respectively. ICC results showed that intraexaminer error reliability was generally excellent (> 0.858 for all three diagnostic modalities), with < 1.45% discrepancy in the Bolton analysis. Conclusions: Laser scanned digital models are highly accurate compared to physical models and CBCT scans for assessing the spatial relationships of dental arches for orthodontic diagnosis.

Keywords

References

  1. Wedrychowska-Szulc B, Janiszewska-Olszowska J, Stepien P. Overall and anterior Bolton ratio in Class I, II, and III orthodontic patients. Eur J Orthod 2010;32:313-8. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjp114
  2. Bolton WA. Disharmony in tooth size and its relation to the analysis and treatment of malocclusion. Angle Orthod 1958;28:113-30.
  3. Bolton WA. The clinical use of a tooth size analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1962;48:504-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(62)90129-X
  4. Othman SA, Harradine NW. Tooth-size discrepancy and Bolton's ratios: a literature review. J Orthod 2006;33:45-51. https://doi.org/10.1179/146531205225021384
  5. Sousa MV, Vasconcelos EC, Janson G, Garib D, Pinzan A. Accuracy and reproducibility of 3-dimensional digital model measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012;142:269-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.12.028
  6. 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.
  7. Mah JK, Huang JC, Choo H. Practical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in orthodontics. J Am Dent Assoc 2010;141 Suppl 3:7S-13S. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2010.0361
  8. Lagravere MO, Carey J, Toogood RW, Major PW. Three-dimensional accuracy of measurements made with software on cone-beam computed tomography images. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:112-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.08.024
  9. Akyalcin S, Dyer DJ, English JD, Sar C. Comparison of 3-dimensional dental models from different sources: diagnostic accuracy and surface registration analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144:831-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.08.014
  10. Flugge TV, Schlager S, Nelson K, Nahles S, Metzger MC. Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144:471-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.017
  11. El-Zanaty HM, El-Beialy AR, Abou El-Ezz AM, Attia KH, El-Bialy AR, Mostafa YA. Three-dimensional dental measurements: An alternative to plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;137:259-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.04.030
  12. Kim J, Heo G, Lagravere MO. Accuracy of laser-scanned models compared to plaster models and cone-beam computed tomography. Angle Orthod 2014;84:443-50. https://doi.org/10.2319/051213-365.1
  13. Whetten JL, Williamson PC, Heo G, Varnhagen C, Major PW. Variations in orthodontic treatment planning decisions of Class II patients between virtual 3-dimensional models and traditional plaster study models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;130:485-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.02.022
  14. 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
  15. Naidu D, Freer TJ. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of the iOC intraoral scanner: a comparison of tooth widths and Bolton ratios. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144:304-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.011
  16. Wiranto MG, Engelbrecht WP, Tutein Nolthenius HE, van der Meer WJ, Ren Y. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of linear measurements on digital models obtained from intraoral and cone-beam computed tomography scans of alginate impressions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;143:140-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.06.018
  17. Proffit WR. Contemporary orthodontics. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2000. p. 170.
  18. Roberts CT, Richmond S. The design and analysis of reliability studies for the use of epidemiological and audit indices in orthodontics. Br J Orthod 1997;24:139-47. https://doi.org/10.1093/ortho/24.2.139
  19. Shellhart WC, Lange DW, Kluemper GT, Hicks EP, Kaplan AL. Reliability of the Bolton tooth-size analysis when applied to crowded dentitions. Angle Orthod 1995;65:327-34.
  20. 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.
  21. Nalcaci R, Topcuoglu T, Ozturk F. Comparison of Bolton analysis and tooth size measurements obtained using conventional and three-dimensional orthodontic models. Eur J Dent 2013;7(Suppl 1):S66-70. https://doi.org/10.4103/1305-7456.119077
  22. Kau CH, Littlefield J, Rainy N, Nguyen JT, Creed B. Evaluation of CBCT digital models and traditional models using the Little's Index. Angle Orthod 2010;80:435-9. https://doi.org/10.2319/083109-491.1

Cited by

  1. Mathematical beta function formulation for maxillary arch form prediction in normal occlusion population vol.105, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-016-0244-7
  2. Accuracy and reproducibility of dental measurements on tomographic digital models: a systematic review and meta-analysis vol.46, pp.7, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1259/dmfr.20160455
  3. Overall and Anterior Tooth Size Ratios in a Group of Emiratis vol.12, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.2174/1745017901814010655
  4. Accuracy and Reliability of Space Analysis Measurements in Digital Models with Different Degrees of Crowding vol.13, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.2174/1874210601913010505
  5. Digital Models: Comparison of Scanning Angulations and Superimposition vol.10, pp.8, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4236/ojst.2020.108021
  6. Assessment of the accuracy of laser-scanned models and 3-dimensional rendered cone-beam computed tomographic images compared to digital caliper measurements on plaster casts vol.51, pp.None, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.20210142
  7. 3D Scanners in Orthodontics-Current Knowledge and Future Perspectives-A Systematic Review vol.18, pp.3, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18031121
  8. Digital (R)Evolution: Open-Source Softwares for Orthodontics vol.11, pp.13, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3390/app11136033