Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Method for Tooth Model Reconstruction Based on Integration of Multimodal Images

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          A complete digital tooth model is needed for computer-aided orthodontic treatment. However, current methods mainly use computed tomography (CT) images to reconstruct the tooth model which may require multiple CT scans during orthodontic progress, and the reconstructed model is also inaccurate in crown area. This study developed a tooth model reconstruction method based on integration of CT images and laser scan images to overcome these disadvantages. In the method, crown models and complete tooth models are first reconstructed, respectively, from laser scan images and CT images. Then, crown models from laser scan images and tooth models from CT images are registered. Finally, the crown from laser scan images and root from CT images were fused to obtain a new tooth model. Experimental results verified that the developed method is effective to generate the complete tooth model by integrating CT images and laser scan images. Using the proposed method, the reconstructed models provide more accurate crown than CT images, and it is feasible to obtain complete tooth models at any stage of orthodontic treatment by using one CT scan at the pretreatment stage and one laser scan at that stage to avoid multiple CT scans.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of plaster vs digital study models: comparison of peer assessment rating and Bolton analysis and their constituent measurements.

          The objective of this validation study was to compare standard plaster models (the current gold standard for cast measurements) with their digital counterparts made with emodel software (version 6.0, GeoDigm, Chanhassen, Minn) for the analysis of tooth sizes and occlusal relationships--specifically the Bolton analysis and the peer assessment rating (PAR) index and their components. Dental casts were poured from 24 subjects with 8 malocclusion types grouped according to American Board of Orthodontics categories. Measurements were made with a digital caliper to the nearest 0.01 mm from plaster models and with the software from the digital models. A paired samples t test was used to compare reliability and validity of measurements between plaster and digital methods. Reproducibility of digital models via the concordance correlation coefficient was excellent in most cases and good in some. Although statistically significant differences in some measurements were found for the reliability and validity of the digital models via the average mean of the absolute differences of repeated measurements, none was clinically significant. Grouping of the measurements according to the 8 American Board of Orthodontics categories produced no significant difference (Kruskal-Wallis test). No measurement associated with Bolton analysis or PAR index made on plaster vs digital models showed a clinically significant difference. The PAR analysis and its constituent measurements were not significantly different clinically between plaster and emodel media. Preliminary results did not indicate that digital models would cause an orthodontist to make a different diagnosis of malocclusion compared with plaster models; digital models are not a compromised choice for treatment planning or diagnosis.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Accuracy of space analysis with emodels and plaster models.

            The purposes of this study were to determine the accuracy and speed of measuring the overall arch length and the Bolton ratio, and the time to perform a Bolton analysis for each patient by using software (emodel, version 6.0, GeoDigm Corp, Chanhassen, Minn) compared with hand-held plaster models. Models from 30 patients selected from the files of the Department of Orthodontics at West Virginia University were included in this study. The mesiodistal width of each tooth from first molar to first molar was measured to the nearest 0.1 mm with digital calipers, and the Bolton ratio was calculated for each patient. The times required to make the measurements and to perform the analysis were recorded in seconds by using a stopwatch. This process was repeated to record the digital measurements with the software. To evaluate whether there was any magnification in the emodels, quarter-inch ball bearings were mounted on a modified study model. Measurements of the greatest diameter were taken on each ball bearing by using digital calipers and the emodel software. The difference between the 2 methods was calculated, and a paired t test was used to analyze the data. There was no significant difference between the Bolton ratios calculated with the 2 methods. A significant difference in arch length calculations was found between the 2 methods, but it was within the range of error found in this study and was considered clinically insignificant. Significant differences were found in the time needed to make the measurements and the calculations between the 2 methods; the emodel software was an average of 65 seconds faster. The measurements on the ball-bearing mounted models were an average of .067 mm greater on the emodel software than direct measurements on the casts (range, 0 to -0.16 mm). The difference was significant (P <.0045). These results suggest that, when performing a Bolton analysis, the emodel can be as accurate as, and significantly faster than, the traditional method of digital calipers and plaster models. A clinician who has switched to using emodel software can be confident in his or her diagnoses using it.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Reliability of measuring facial morphology with a 3-dimensional laser scanning system.

              The purpose of this prospective clinical trial was to evaluate the reliability of a 3-dimensional facial scanning technique for the measurement of facial morphology. A field study was conducted in 2 comprehensive schools in the South Wales region of the United Kingdom. Forty subjects, mean age 11 years 3 months, were analyzed for soft tissue changes at baseline (T1), within 3 minutes (T2), and 3 days later (T3) by using 2 commercially available Minolta Vivid 900 (Osaka, Japan) laser-scanning devices assembled as a stereo pair. Left and right images were merged to form the whole face, and these images were superimposed to assess the errors at T1 and T2, and T1 and T3. The results showed that premerged left and right mean shell deviations were 0.38 +/- 0.14 mm for scans at T1, 0.31 +/- 0.09 mm at T2, and 0.34 +/- 0.12 mm at T3. The mean differences of the merged composite face were 0.31 +/- 0.08 mm between T1 and T2, and 0.40 +/- 0.11 mm between T1 and T3. Paired t tests showed no significant difference between these groups (P > .05). Shell deviation facial maps of the merged scans showed that 90% of the created composite facial scans were within an error of 0.85 mm. Capturing the soft tissue morphology of the face with this technique is clinically reproducible within 3 minutes and 3 days of the initial records.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                J Healthc Eng
                J Healthc Eng
                JHE
                Journal of Healthcare Engineering
                Hindawi
                2040-2295
                2040-2309
                2018
                20 June 2018
                : 2018
                : 4950131
                Affiliations
                1Department of Automation, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China
                2Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen 518055, China
                3CAS Key Laboratory of Human-Machine Intelligence-Synergy Systems, Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China
                Author notes

                Academic Editor: Yong Xia

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0075-7949
                Article
                10.1155/2018/4950131
                6031084
                30026903
                17b25956-495d-47fb-8323-804e398b6748
                Copyright © 2018 Xinwen Zhou et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 17 November 2017
                : 7 May 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: National Natural Science Foundation of China
                Award ID: 61601452
                Funded by: Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province
                Award ID: 2015A030306020
                Funded by: Youth Innovation Promotion Association of the Chinese Academy of Sciences
                Award ID: 2015301
                Funded by: Shenzhen Research Project
                Award ID: JCYJ20170818162801483
                Award ID: JCYJ20170413162458312
                Award ID: GJHS20160331185913023
                Award ID: GJHS20170314154158554
                Categories
                Research Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content519

                Cited by6

                Most referenced authors300