Authors: M. Konvalinková 1,2; M. Koťová 1,2 Authors place of work: Oddělení ortodoncie a rozštěpových vad Stomatologické kliniky 3. LF UK a FNKV, Praha 1; Klinika zubního lékařství LF UP a FN, Olomouc 2 Published in the journal: Česká stomatologie / Praktické zubní lékařství, ročník 118, 2018, 1, s. 13-24 Category: Přehledový článek
Objective: The aim of the paper is to familiarize the reader with the current status in the possibilities of using 3D scanners in dental and orthodontic practices.
Introduction: The digitization of models brings countless benefits, whether it is measurement on models, communication of treatment with other professionals, storage or making them.
Material and methodology: Laboratory and intraoral scanners available in the current market.
Results: The accuracy and high level of technical parameters of all the scanners described is favorable for use in medical practice. From the laboratory scanners, the 3Shape is a favorite for orthodontists in the Czech Republic for its fast scanning. From intraoral scanners, Trios (3Shape) is the most widely used scanner, and now more and more iTero® for its direct connection to the Invisalign system.
Conclusion: 3D scanners are practical helpers for the orthodontists, for patients‘ pleasurable comfort. They are expanding and facilitating professional communication, and they are also a means of illustrating the progress and variants of therapy for a particular patient. Over the course of several years, they will undoubtedly become a common part of most dental practices.
Keywords: 3D scanners – orthodontics – digitization
1. Abizadeh, N., Moles, D. R., O´Neill, J., Noar, J. H.: Digital versus plaster study models: How accurate and reproducible are they? J. Orthodont., roč. 39, 2012, č. 3, s. 151–159.
2. Akyalcin, S., Cozad, B. E., English, J. D., Colville, C. D., Laman, S.: Diagnostic accuracy of impression-free digital models. Am. J. Orthodont. Dentofacial Orthop., roč. 144, 2013, č. 6, s. 916–922.
3. Alcan, T., Ceylanoglu, C., Baysal, B.: The relationship between digital model accuracy and time-dependent deformation of alginate impressions. Angle Orthodont., roč. 79, 2009, č. 1, s. 30–36.
4. Brusco, N., Andreetto, M., Lucchese, L.: Metrological validation for 3D modeling of dental plaster casts. Med. Enging. Phys., roč. 29, 2007, č. 9, s. 954–966.
5. Correia, G. D., Habib, F. A., Vogel, C. J.: Tooth-size discrepancy: A comparison between manual and digital methods. Dental Press J. Orthodont., roč. 19, 2014, č. 4, s. 107–113.
6. CS 3500 | Intraoral Scanner from Carestream Dental. Dostupné na: http:// www.carestreamdental.com/us/en/scan/CS%203500#Features%20and%20Benefits/.
7. Cuperus, A. M. R., et al.: Dental models made with an intraoral scanner: a validation study. Amer. J. Orthodont. Dentofacial Orthop., roč. 142, 2012, č. 3, s. 308–313.
8. Dalstra, M., Melsen, B.: From alginate impressions to digital virtual models: accuracy and reproducibility. J. Orthodont., roč. 36, 2009, č. 1, s. 36–41.
9. Digital Impressions: 3M™ True Definition Scanner. Dostupné na: http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en_US/3M-ESPE-NA/dental-professionals/ products/category/digital-materials/true-definition-scanner/.
10. Fleming, P. S., Marinho, V., Johal, A.: Orthodontic measurements on digital study models compared with plaster models: a systematic review. Orthodont. Craniofacial Res., roč. 14, 2011, č. 1, s. 1–16.
11. Flügge, T. V., Schlager, S., Nelson, K., Nahles, S., Metzger, M. C.: Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner. Am. J. Orthodont. Dentofacial Orthop., roč. 144, 2013, s. 471–478.
12. Garino, F., Garino, B.: The iOC intraoral scanner and Invisalign: a new paradigm. J. Clin. Orthodont., roč. 46, 2012, č. 2, s. 115–121.
13. Garino, F., Garino, G. B., Castroflorio, T.: The iTero intraoral scanner in Invisalign treatment: a two-year report. J. Clin. Orthodont., roč. 48, 2014, č. 2, s. 98–106.
14. Hayashi, K., Sachdeva, A. U., Saitoh, S., Lee, S. P., Kubota, T., Mizoguchi, I.: Assessment of the accuracy and reliability of new 3-dimensional scanning devices. Am. J. Orthodont. Dentofacial Orthop., 2013, 144, č. 4, s. 619–625.
15. Kim, J., Heo, G., Lagravére, M. O.: Accuracy of laser-scanned models compared to plaster models and cone-beam computed tomography. Angle Orthodont., roč. 84, 2014, č. 3, s. 443–450.
16. Kravitz, N. D., Groth, C., Jones, P. E., Graham, J. W., Redmond, W. R.: Intraoral digital scanners. J. Clin. Orthodont., 2014, 48, s. 337–347.
17. Lee, S. J., Gallucci, G. O.: Digital vs. conventional implant impressions: efficiency outcomes. Clin. Oral Implants Res., roč. 24, 2013, č. 1, s. 111–115.
18. Logozzo, S., Zanetti, E. L., Franceschini, G., Kilpelä, A. R., Mäkynen, A. N. S.: Recent advances in dental optics – Part I: 3D intraoral scanners for restorative dentistry. Opt. Lasers Eng., 2014, 54, s. 203–221.
19. Lythos Digital Impression System. Dostupné na: http://www.ormco.com/products/ lythos/.
20. Naidu, D., Freer, T. J.: Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of the iOC intraoral scanner: a comparison of tooth widths and Bolton ratios. Am. J. Orthodont. Dentofacial Orthop., roč. 144, 2013, č. 2, s. 304–310.
21. Okunami, T. R., Kusnoto, B., BeGole, E., Evans, C. A., Sadowsky, C., Fadavi, S.: Assessing the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system: digital vs plaster dental casts. Am. J. Orthodont. Dentofacial Orthop., 2007, 31, s. 51–56.
22. Patzelt, S. B. M., Emmanouilidi, A., Stampf, S., Strub, J. R., Wael, A.: Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral scanners. Clin. Oral Investig., 2014, 18, s. 1687–1694.
23. Patzelt, S. B., Lamprinos, C., Stampf, S., Att, W.: The time efficiency of intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparative study. J. Am. Dent. Assoc., roč. 145, 2014, č. 6, s. 542–551.
24. Peluso, M. J., et al.: Digital models: an introduction. Semin. Orthod. Elsevier, 2004, č. 10, s. 226–328.
25. Planmeca PlanScan®. Dostupné na: http://www.prodenta.cz/produkty/cad-cam/ planmeca-planscan/.
26. Quimby, M. L., Vig, K. W., Rashid, R. G., Firestone, A. R.: The accuracy and reliability of measurements made on computer-based digital models. Angle Orthodont., roč. 74, 2004, č. 3, s. 298–303.
27. Redmond, W. R., Redmond, W. J., Redmond, J. R.: Ortho bytes. Am. J. Orthodont. Dentofacial Orthop., 2000, 117, s. 240–241.
28. Rheude, B. R., Sadowsky, P. L., Ferreira, A., Jacobson, A.: An evaluation of the use of digital study models in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Angle Orthodont., 2005, 75, s. 300–304.
29. Russell, M.: Destroying patient records. California Association of Orthodontists Website 2002. Dostupné na: www.caortho.org.
30. Santoro, M., Galkin, S., Teredesai, M., Nicolay, O. F., Cangialosi, T. J.: Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models. Amer. J. Orthodont. Dentofacial Orthop., roč. 124, 2003, č. 1, s. 101–105.
31. Stevens, D. R., et al.: Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of plaster vs digital study models: Comparison of peer assessment rating and Bolton analysis and their constituent measurements. Amer. J. Orthodont. Dentofacial Orthop., roč. 129, 2006, č. 6, s. 794–803.
32. 3D Professional Scanner –3D Dental Scanner. Dostupné na: http://www.maestro3d.com/.
33. 3D Progress Digital Impression. Dostupné na http://www.3dprogress.it/.
34. 3Shape Orthodontics. Dostupné na: http://www.3shapedental.com/orthodontics. aspx/.
Zvyšte si kvalifikaci online z pohodlí domova
Nemáte účet? Registrujte se
Zadejte e-mailovou adresu, se kterou jste vytvářel(a) účet, budou Vám na ni zaslány informace k nastavení nového hesla.
