Literature DB >> 26100820

Multibracket appliance: impression defaults and their reduction by blocking-out  -  a three-dimensional study.

Susanne Wriedt1, Moritz Foersch2, Jan Daniel Muhle2, Irene Schmidtmann3, Heinrich Wehrbein2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study examines accuracy of dental impressions and following plaster models taken during treatment with fixed appliances.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A maxillary typodont was provided with brackets. Three examiners took impressions three times each of the variants: brackets only, archwire fixed by alastics, ligatures or Kobayashi-hooks, and brackets and archwire covered completely or just on the gingival side by protection or impression wax. Casts were scanned using Activity102(®). Virtual models were compared to the scan of the typodont using Comparison(®). Differences were measured and descriptively analyzed. Estimated means with 95% confidence intervals were computed. Significance was assessed using linear mixed models.
RESULTS: While pyramidal reference blocks had a mean difference of 0.019 mm (95% CI = 0.017-0.021 mm) to the master model, teeth without attachments showed 0.097 mm (95% CI = 0.082-0.111 mm), and teeth with brackets 0.169 mm (95% CI = 0.156-0.182 mm) (p < 0.001). Smallest mean was found when using protection wax only on the gingival bracket side (0.152 mm (95% CI = 0.113-0.192 mm)). Incisors deviated most (0.258 mm (95 % CI = 0.239-0.277 mm)).
CONCLUSIONS: Teeth with brackets make impressions more inaccurate because of undercuts. Removing the archwire before taking the impression or covering the brackets on the gingival side shows tendencies toward better precision. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Taking impressions during treatment with fixed appliances, some inaccuracy has to be taken into account.

Keywords:  3D scanner; Accuracy; Alginate; Dental impression; Digital model; Orthodontic brackets

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26100820     DOI: 10.1007/s00784-015-1514-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Investig        ISSN: 1432-6981            Impact factor:   3.573


  34 in total

1.  Three-dimensional analysis of maxillary dental casts using Fourier transform profilometry: precision and reliability of the measurement.

Authors:  Pavel Trefný; Zbynek Smahel; Pavel Formánek; Miroslav Peterka
Journal:  Cleft Palate Craniofac J       Date:  2004-01

Review 2.  Orthodontic measurements on digital study models compared with plaster models: a systematic review.

Authors:  P S Fleming; V Marinho; A Johal
Journal:  Orthod Craniofac Res       Date:  2010-11-22       Impact factor: 1.826

3.  Digital 3D image of bimaxillary casts connected by a vestibular scan.

Authors:  Susanne Wriedt; Irene Schmidtmann; Mareike Niemann; Heinrich Wehrbein
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2013-06-28       Impact factor: 1.938

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

Authors:  Daron R Stevens; Carlos Flores-Mir; Brian Nebbe; Donald W Raboud; Giseon Heo; Paul W Major
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.650

5.  Moiré topography.

Authors:  H Takasaki
Journal:  Appl Opt       Date:  1970-06-01       Impact factor: 1.980

6.  A new system for scanning, measuring and analyzing dental casts based on a 3D holographic sensor.

Authors:  M Redlich; T Weinstock; Y Abed; R Schneor; Y Holdstein; A Fischer
Journal:  Orthod Craniofac Res       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 1.826

7.  Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of linear measurements on digital models obtained from intraoral and cone-beam computed tomography scans of alginate impressions.

Authors:  Matthew G Wiranto; W Petrie Engelbrecht; Heleen E Tutein Nolthenius; W Joerd van der Meer; Yijin Ren
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 2.650

8.  An evaluation of the use of digital study models in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning.

Authors:  Brian Rheude; P Lionel Sadowsky; Andre Ferriera; Alex Jacobson
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 2.079

9.  Two- or three-dimensional cast analysis in patients with cleft lip and palate?

Authors:  B Braumann; S E Rosenhayn; C Bourauel; A Jäger
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 1.938

10.  The relationship between digital model accuracy and time-dependent deformation of alginate impressions.

Authors:  Toros Alcan; Cenk Ceylanoğlu; Bekir Baysal
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.079

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.